RE: Network for Sale

["Daniel L. Golding" <dan () netrail net>]

Nick,

Savvis was first by a very long time. As I understand it, they cooled to
the idea after a while. InterNAP came later, and executed (at least
marketing and sales-wise), much better. 

Regardless of the hype, there's a big difference between a PNAP/POP from
one of these guys, and what is conventionally thought of as a NAP.

- Daniel Golding

On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Kampeas, Nick (EPIK.ORL) wrote:

> Now that you brought up that point, let me interject with two question.
> What is the difference between Internap and Savvis (short of the names and
> financial status)?  Who came up with the minnaps first?
>
> Nick Kampeas
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dan () netrail net]
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 4:20 PM
> To: Majdi S. Abbas; Alex Bligh
> Cc: nanog () merit edu
> Subject: RE: Network for Sale
>
>
>
> InterNAP has done the tier-0 marketing dance for some time. Quite
> successfully, as a matter of fact. Secret Sauce sells like hotcakes. Wall
> Street likes it as well. Not much of a performance increase, though.
>
> - Daniel Golding
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
> > Majdi S. Abbas
> > Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 3:09 PM
> > To: Alex Bligh
> > Cc: nanog () merit edu
> > Subject: Re: Network for Sale
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:51:30PM +0000, Alex Bligh wrote:
> > > If you refuse to peer with anyone at all, you can be tier-0. This
> > > can be achieved with considerable savings to phone line utilization.
> >
> >     Actually, we already have a tier-0.  See:
> >
> >     http://www.opnix.net/perl/PressRelease.cgi?article=100032
> >
> >     (And many other things on their website.)
> >
> >     Particularly amusing is:
> >
> >     http://www.opnix.net/whatwedo/performance.shtml
> >
> >     --msa