Re: Sprint VS. Qwest

[dgold <dgold () FDFNet Net>]

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, dgold wrote:
>
> > What possible reason would the average small transit buyer have for
> > knowing the details of a carrier's peering arrangements - especially
> > carriers like Sprint and Qwest?
>
> Are you suggesting that small providers care less about who they purchase their
> Internet connectivity from? Hmm.

Of course I didn't say that. I did say that smaller transit customers
have, or should have, a set of criteria where their upstream's peering
arrangements are not at the top of the list. Customer support, speed of
provisioning, and feature-set all tend to be more important for the
smaller transit buyer. Peering congestion may be an issue - however, sizes
and locations of peering interconnects are not, unless you have enough
traffic to potentially overwhelm one.


[snip]

> Steve
>
> > That is an actual performance metric, and could tend to seperate some
> > providers from others, and reward those who keep their peering connections
> > properly sized. Perhaps this is what you mean by "better" peering?
> > Locations and sizes won't help you at all, if this is what you are looking
> > for.
> >
> > I suppose the question is, what is your goal? If you are looking for
> > transit, there are numerous criteria -
> >
> > - price
> > - customer service
> > - clueful engineer accessability
> > - network stability
> > - network "reach" - i.e. do they have a POP where you want to
> > interconnect?
> > - Packetloss and latency metrics
> > - Special features - rich community set, multicast, etc
> >
> >
> > - Dan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
> >
> > > Well Sprints non-peering policy is second to none if that helps with C&W a close
> > > second..... :)
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > > On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Christopher K. Neitzert wrote:
> > >
> > > > List,
> > > >
> > > > Neither Sprint nor Qwest are serious about earning my business and are not
> > > > providing me with their network peering details.  I was hoping that the
> > > > list might have the collective resources to help me determine who has
> > > > better peering.
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > > >
> > > > chirstopher