nanog mailing list archives
Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?]
From: Troy Davis <troy () nack net>
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 15:38:43 -0700
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 01:39:03PM -0700, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
building owners. so, though the six does have a core, it is also kinda splattered into switches all over the building; with ease of connection and low cost being achieved at the expense of reliability.
Though that's true, the SIX has been extremely reliable: one unscheduled core outage in the last 3 years (about 30 minutes due to power loss). In one other case, an extension switch (7 peers) was disconnected for about 30 minutes to troubleshoot a potential problem. Peer-operated extension switches have also been very reliable. Most are above 99.9% availability including scheduled maintenance and 99.99% for unscheduled problems. The SIX's staffed 24x7 NOC lets peers treat it like any other carrier relationship, with one phone number to report a problem. Often the ops staff at national networks never know the SIX is non-profit or donation-supported. Peers of all sizes seem happy with the reliability. Everyone has open-posting mailing lists and an annual opportunity to elect the Board of Directors, so there is recourse if circumstances change. Cheers, Troy (SIX janitor)
Current thread:
- RE: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Michael Smith (Jul 03)
- RE: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 03)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 03)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Randy Bush (Jul 03)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Troy Davis (Jul 03)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Randy Bush (Jul 03)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Randy Bush (Jul 03)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Bill Woodcock (Jul 04)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Steve Gibbard (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points Niels Bakker (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points Christopher L. Morrow (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] joe mcguckin (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] vijay gill (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Patrick W Gilmore (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Tony Li (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Patrick W Gilmore (Jul 05)