nanog mailing list archives
Re: XO Routing
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:53:10 -0700
On 9/16/10 9:35 AM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
Hopefully they don't treat this the same way they treat their billing, otherwise you all will be degraded for months or even years. It is absolutely amazing that this company is still in business.
The "big guys" will always remain in business, or be absorbed into another equal or larger entity to form an even bigger one, regardless of their practices. (A fringe exception would be AT&T's court ordered breakup.) The larger they get the much more spectacular the faults tend to be. Whereas with smaller providers like myself, how I treat my customers factors in as a major aspect to whether or not they stick around. I can't compete strictly on price with the big guys, but I do absorb their BS and shield my customers from it as much as possible. If I treated my customers like the big guys do, I wouldn't have any. ~Seth
Current thread:
- XO Routing Stefan Molnar (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Charles Mills (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Patrick W. Gilmore (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing William Byrd (Sep 16)
- RE: XO Routing Calkins, Mark (Sep 16)
- RE: XO Routing Calkins, Mark (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Jeffrey Lyon (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Seth Mattinen (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Patrick W. Gilmore (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Chris Woodfield (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Stefan Molnar (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Patrick W. Gilmore (Sep 16)
- Re: XO Routing Charles Mills (Sep 16)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: XO Routing David Hubbard (Sep 16)
- RE: XO Routing Stefan Molnar (Sep 16)