nanog mailing list archives
Re: Collocation Access
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 15:55:43 -0500 (EST)
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006, Daniel Golding wrote:
Time for a colocation reality check. Why would facilities need to have tight security? Lets count off the reasons...
Don't forget the biggie. These are "shared use facilities." People who buy space in collocation facilities already have lower security requirements. The only thing keeping the "bad guys" out is whether
their payment clears. Security by poverty?
Current thread:
- Re: Collocation Access, (continued)
- Re: Collocation Access Joe Maimon (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Jim Popovitch (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Patrick W. Gilmore (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Leo Vegoda (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Patrick W. Gilmore (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Mark Newton (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Joe Abley (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Leo Vegoda (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access chuck goolsbee (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Daniel Golding (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Sean Donelan (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Brandon Galbraith (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Joe Provo (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Joe Maimon (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Aaron Glenn (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Gaurab Raj Upadhaya (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Marshall Eubanks (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access John Curran (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Joe Maimon (Dec 28)
- Re: Collocation Access Owen DeLong (Dec 27)
- Re: Collocation Access Jim Popovitch (Dec 27)