> I'm not sure how Equinix is in other cities, but in Chicago, they are just > one tenant among many in the building. Equinix charges a lot for > everything.
Thats good to know. Here in Ashburn, its not the case, they own all the buildings, and there are several. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <wispawirel...@ics-il.net> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 12:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams > I'm not sure how Equinix is in other cities, but in Chicago, they are just > one tenant among many in the building. Equinix charges a lot for > everything. If you can find another tenant such as TelX or a web host, > I'd > go there (depending on cross connect charges). > > It's transit. Usually in the metro areas, transit is cheaper than > transport > because with transport they have to be able to carry 100% of the traffic > to > wherever it's going. With transit, they can offload (maybe significant) > portions of the traffic to other carriers within the building instead of > on > their 10GigEs going elsewhere. > > I'd recommend that anyone in a metro area *investigate* dark fiber > thoroughly. I'm too small to buy it on my own, but depending on the > market, > dark fiber can be cheap and get you to where you need to be. It's not > always in the right spots outside of the carrier hotels, but usually that > can be solved by short builds or wireless. > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Tom DeReggi" <wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net> > Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:39 AM > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams > >>> HE even has $1250 GEs >> >> Wow, is that transport or transit? >> >> Yeah, 2 months ago, we were going to get an Abovenet transport to >> Hurricain >> transit because Hurricane's market low pricing, but then Equinix started >> giving us a hard time on colo, trying to charge us more for the colo than >> both the transport and transit links combined, so we pulled the plug on >> the >> order. >> >> Hurricaine had the $2 /mb on GIg-E as long as also do IPv6 w/ IPv4. But >> where HE did better is they also gave good pricing on the low capacity >> commits. That makes it cost effective to give HE a try, before going all >> out, provided you're in a colo they are at. >> >> We also found a couple providers that had some really cool programs like >> you >> commit to a monthly dollar figure, but could accept the bandwdith from >> any >> Equinix facility or distributed between several of them, and move the >> capacity on the fly to either location. It was great option for someone >> wanting to expand nationwide, but not knowing where sales will develop >> first >> more. >> But it also allowed Gig-E pricing without having to pay for GIg-E in >> multiple locations. >> >> Its to bad its at Equinix though, cause a lot of teh value proposition >> got >> killed once transport added to it to get out to remote cell site, or >> Equinix's clueless overcharging of antenna roof space. >> Again its really sad when someone tried to charge more for an antenna >> position than a GIg-E fiber link. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mike Hammett" <wispawirel...@ics-il.net> >> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:24 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams >> >> >>> Not to you, but to the thread: >>> >>> Cogent isn't even the low cost leader anymore. >>> >>> PCCW is often cheaper as is HE. >>> >>> HE even has $1250 GEs and $400 FEs. >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "Tom DeReggi" <wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net> >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:17 PM >>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams >>> >>>> Brad, >>>> >>>> Once again I disagree. >>>> >>>> Cogent represents themselves as low cost, but they have never >>>> represented >>>> themselves as low quality. >>>> >>>> Second, Cogent is most ideal as the FIRST PRIMARY provider, because >>>> Cogent >>>> is higher performing, and faster speed connections are more affordable. >>>> I agree, a backup secondary provider is needed to help when there are >>>> short >>>> outages. The backup providers dont need to be as high a capacity, or as >>>> quality, as they are seldom used exempt in the rare emergencies. >>>> >>>> Third, What determines how inexpensive a Transit provider is has >>>> nothing >>>> to >>>> do with Quality, it has to do with who has more settlement free peers. >>>> Cogent costs less, because Cogent has to pay "fewer" other ISPs for >>>> capacity. This DOES NOT mean they use low quality public peering, it >>>> means >>>> that they have more quality private peering negotiated at better terms. >>>> >>>>> Bottom line is any carrier can break >>>> >>>> That, I agree with. Which is why its important to have two upstreams. >>>> But, >>>> that is not a reason to not buy Cogent first. >>>> By buying Cogent first it allows a provider to become more profitable >>>> sooner, and therefore able to afford sooner multiple upstreams. >>>> >>>> Its also depends on what the downstream offers in its value >>>> proposition. >>>> With Cogent, I offer my custoemrs Gig-E when others can offer 100mb. >>>> With Cogent, I can offer my customers half the price, if not 1/3rd the >>>> price >>>> that my tier2 competitiors can offer. >>>> With Cogent, I offer excellent performance, better than most, most of >>>> the >>>> time, and if they get an outage so what. >>>> Is it really better to have less good performance all the time, to gain >>>> .009 >>>> better uptime? >>>> That depends on the target client base of the WISP. >>>> >>>> You also got another thing right... I am largely dependant on Cogent, >>>> and >>>> I >>>> hate that. But its relevent to ask why I'm dependant? When I first >>>> started >>>> out, it was because of price, but not anymore. I'm dependant on Cogent >>>> because its really hard to find a Tier1 Carrier that can offer anywhere >>>> near >>>> as equivellent consistent performance and tech support. My customers >>>> really >>>> noticed, everytime I tried someone else, so someone else never lastest. >>>> >>>> Note that I did not say "uptime", I said "performance". >>>> >>>> Tom DeReggi >>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Brad Belton" <b...@belwave.com> >>>> To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 6:01 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams >>>> >>>> >>>>> While I agree no solution can be considered equal in any given >>>>> location, >>>>> there are trends or a general barometer to help place one carrier over >>>>> another. This is the reality that typically puts Cogent towards the >>>>> back >>>>> of >>>>> the bus in most people's minds. >>>>> >>>>> The biggest proponents of Cogent are those that are largely dependent >>>>> on >>>>> Cogent due to any number of reasons. Budget constraints, lack of >>>>> alternate >>>>> higher quality peer availability etc, etc. Cogent makes no excuse >>>>> promoting >>>>> themselves as the low end, budget driven bottom dollar provider. They >>>>> are >>>>> good for what they offer, but again not what a network administrator >>>>> looking >>>>> for high availability is going to pick as a first choice. >>>>> >>>>> "You might even get away with saying Cogent has a few more short >>>>> duration >>>>> (less than 15 minutes?) outages than other carriers." >>>>> >>>>> This is exactly my point (being made by Tom, a Cogent customer!) why >>>>> Cogent >>>>> should not be depended on as a sole or primary Internet feed. If >>>>> Cogent's >>>>> all you got then you're SOL! >>>>> >>>>> Bottom line is any carrier can break. If you can only have one then >>>>> find >>>>> one that breaks the least. If you can have more than one, Cogent is a >>>>> good >>>>> low cost second or third to have in a pinch for relatively little >>>>> cost. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Brad >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] >>>>> On >>>>> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:28 PM >>>>> To: WISPA General List >>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams >>>>> >>>>> It should be noted that an Upstreams performance can be directly >>>>> proportional to the location where they have more peering. >>>>> In the DC and NY markets, Cogent has excellent performance and >>>>> peering, >>>>> and >>>>> >>>>> has shown to outperform EVERY provider we have tried, period. >>>>> (And yes, some of the carriers we tried were Level3, XO, and >>>>> Abovenet.) >>>>> I recognize that Cogent's performance "may" not be as good for ALL >>>>> markets >>>>> where they potentially could have a weaker presence. >>>>> But saying Cogent is only worthy of the 3rd or 4th transit connection >>>>> is >>>>> simply untrue. >>>>> >>>>> Cogent's weak point now is internal processes and communication. >>>>> They've >>>>> lost touch with the value of having personal Account Reps, and render >>>>> the >>>>> reps powerless to manage the accounts, in favor of the customer >>>>> relationship >>>>> >>>>> managed by the clueless billing/collections department. Its a shame. >>>>> You >>>>> might even get away with saying Cogent has a few more short duration >>>>> (less >>>>> than 15 minutes?) outages than other carriers. But their tech support >>>>> has >>>>> been the best by far in the industry, and oversubscription has never >>>>> been >>>>> a >>>>> problem from what I see. >>>>> >>>>> In picking a Transit provider its really a decision about where your >>>>> traffic >>>>> >>>>> typically flows, and where you need good performance to. NOT anyone >>>>> has >>>>> best >>>>> >>>>> performance everywhere. >>>>> For example, Hurricane has excellent performance AND they are >>>>> inexpensive. >>>>> They have a really good peering presensence in CA. I'm not confident >>>>> that >>>>> they have nearly as good a presence on the East coast though, but >>>>> those >>>>> that >>>>> >>>>> have used them on teh east coast that I know have been happy. We were >>>>> considering using them. >>>>> >>>>> Abovenet has great Gig-E Transport. But their transit is expensive, >>>>> and >>>>> its >>>>> because its more expensive for them to provide it, because they are >>>>> not >>>>> as >>>>> well positioned to do it cost effectively, not because its >>>>> necessarilly >>>>> better. Level3 as well, has many strength. They have a lot of web >>>>> host >>>>> clients. It can really help performance to reach certain sites. Level3 >>>>> also >>>>> tends to blocks smaller BGP block announcements, more so than someone >>>>> like >>>>> Cogent. Level3 is good for a secondaryu because they usually have >>>>> diverse >>>>> routes. Some providers have good performance to France, Amsterdam, >>>>> India, >>>>> others dont. Savvis tends to have real peering to NY finacnial >>>>> markets. >>>>> I >>>>> often see Blended bandwdith combining Global Cross and Level3, not >>>>> sure >>>>> why >>>>> these two are chosen as a pair. Maybe its simply becaue they tend to >>>>> be >>>>> colocated at the same carrier hotels? >>>>> >>>>> But selecting a transit provider is not as simple as saying one is >>>>> better. >>>>> My personaly opinion is, find the two lowest cost providers, and then >>>>> you >>>>> can afford to buy more bandwidth, and have two options to route >>>>> customers. >>>>> >>>>> You also need to consider the path to where you take it. For example, >>>>> Cogent >>>>> >>>>> remote tenant buildings likely have routers with less ram that cant >>>>> handle >>>>> full BGP tables, so they require creating session to two seperate BGP >>>>> servers (with the second one having full routes.). But of you connect >>>>> to >>>>> them inb a major colo center that doesn;t exist. Similar things exist >>>>> with >>>>> other providers depending on where you pick up the circuit. >>>>> >>>>> What I like about Abovenet, is they'll map out their network for you, >>>>> so >>>>> you >>>>> >>>>> know exactly what you are buying, so true redunancy can be built into >>>>> the >>>>> network design. Cogent is a bit more secrative about the traffic path. >>>>> >>>>> XO has had some really good account reps, and I liked that. But for >>>>> me, >>>>> they >>>>> >>>>> didn't really give me anything exciting as far as price or >>>>> performance, >>>>> more >>>>> >>>>> than anyone else. >>>>> >>>>> It should also be noted that it could make a big difference which >>>>> local >>>>> colo >>>>> >>>>> you pick the circuit up in also. So when you are evaluating a provider >>>>> you >>>>> are also evaluating the venue where the circuit is in. >>>>> >>>>> Tom DeReggi >>>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Brad Belton" <b...@belwave.com> >>>>> To: <bcl...@spectraaccess.com>; "'WISPA General List'" >>>>> <wireless@wispa.org> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:47 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Cogent can be ok, but they are not equal to AboveNET, XO, AT&T, >>>>>> Level3 >>>>>> etc... We have multiple upstream GigE feeds and Cogent is one of >>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> It took us months to get Cogent to resolve a flapping switch or >>>>>> router >>>>>> within their network. After a couple dozen screenshots and trace >>>>>> routes >>>>>> from various looking glass sites they finally conceded. Granted the >>>>>> outages >>>>>> were only between 5 and 60 seconds long when they occurred and rarely >>>>>> were >>>>>> long enough to break BGP sessions, but they were hell on VoIP! >>>>>> >>>>>> It took us less than a day to find the specific Cogent IP or device >>>>>> where >>>>>> the problem was occurring, but months before Cogent acted on the >>>>>> information >>>>>> we provided them. Cogent Support honestly wasn't that bad, but said >>>>>> their >>>>>> hands were tied until management further up the chain completed their >>>>>> investigation. During that time we had to route voice traffic around >>>>>> Cogent >>>>>> as best we could. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cogent is great as a cheap third or fourth GigE upstream, but never a >>>>>> sole >>>>>> or primary Internet feed, IMO. While Cogent goes about their BGP >>>>>> peering >>>>>> a >>>>>> little different than most, I do agree their BGP Support is equal to >>>>>> anyone >>>>>> else's we've worked with. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Brad >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] >>>>>> On >>>>>> Behalf Of Bret Clark >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 1:15 PM >>>>>> To: WISPA General List >>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams >>>>>> >>>>>> I always hear about Cogent having a bad rap, but where does that come >>>>>> from? I can't say that one bit! They've worked great for us and >>>>>> during >>>>>> the initial install clearly went above and beyond the call of duty >>>>>> when >>>>>> we encountered a problem even waking a VP up at 1AM on a Sunday >>>>>> morning >>>>>> because we need to have the circuit up and running by first thing >>>>>> Monday! >>>>>> >>>>>> When I have add to call their tech support up about questions that >>>>>> actually understand what BGP is and how it works! >>>>>> Bret >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 11:58 -0500, Jon Auer wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Cogent has a bad rap but they have been solid for us for the past >>>>>>> year. Prior to that they had a few hickups. Their peering is pretty >>>>>>> good. Low latency to all major content sites. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Level3 seems to have more outages than a provider of their >>>>>>> reputation >>>>>> should. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Savvis is has poor peering from what I hear. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to add Abovenet or Global crossing to my mix. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10/21/09, Marco Coelho <coelh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> > I'm a GigE circuit to the mix, and I've got a choice of: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Abovenet >>>>>>> > Cogent >>>>>>> > Global Crossing >>>>>>> > Level3 >>>>>>> > Savvis >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > I'm looking for recommendations of who the better upstream is. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Marco >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > -- >>>>>>> > Marco C. Coelho >>>>>>> > Argon Technologies Inc. >>>>>>> > POB 875 >>>>>>> > Greenville, TX 75403-0875 >>>>>>> > 903-455-5036 >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> ---- >>>>>>> > WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>>> > http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> ---- >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>>> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> >>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>> >>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> ---- >>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> ---- >>>>>> >>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>> >>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> ---- >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> ---- >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>> >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
