Re: Market for diversity

[Jason LeBlanc <jml () packetpimp org>]

I agree with this, and many people take the Ts & Cs, MSA, etc the vendor 
anyway.  We have a standing habit of reading over our new contracts with 
our attorney on a con call, we always edit them, send them back to the 
vendor and negotiate on any changes.  Its amazing how much you can get 
things changed in your favor if you're persistent.

More on point for this thread, I always have new vendors bring in fiber 
maps and show me their paths.  Images of the intended path specified on 
the map are part of the contract, including verbage regarding failover 
paths.  Once I know where their fiber is, I can look for another vendor 
that takes a different path.  Some locations are easier than others of 
course.  A lot depends on what the motto is as to where they like to run 
fiber, or who they lease/bought their fiber from. 

What I find hard to combat are M&A changing operations over time, 
overlooking contractual obligations on the vendor's part usually.  This 
is a reason we always use 12 mo terms, we can change things fast enough 
to beat their changing things for us.  Sometimes we even go back to the 
same vendor, just to make sure the new company and contract detail what 
we have and where it goes.  Sounds a little tedious, but at least you 
know where your circuits go.

Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Andy Davidson wrote:
> > Is it not possible to require that each of your suppliers provide 
> > over a specified path ?  I'm planning a build-out that will require a 
> > diverse path between two points, and one supplier has named two 
> > routes, and promised that they wont change for the duration of the 
> > contract.  Perhaps I am naive, but a promise should be a promise.
>
> Just naive.  Most people make assumptions about what was promised.  If it
> sounds too good to be true, it probably is.  What the sales person 
> promises, the fine print takes away.
>
> http://www.atis.org/ndai/ATIS_NDAI_Final_Report_2006.pdf
>
> You will find out no one will sell to you if the contract requires 
> some things, and the alternatives are rather limited.
>
> I would be more concerned about suppliers that promise things that 
> aren't possible than suppliers that decline to sell things that aren't 
> possible.
> Unrealastic buyers are just as much of a problem as non-performance by 
> sellers.
>
> If anyone promises their network will never do down, they will never have
> single paths, they are perfect; you should grab your wallet and run away.