nanog mailing list archives
Re: value of co-location
From: Dennis Ferguson <dennis () Ipsilon COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 10:19:22 -0800
From: "George H. Clapp" <clapp () bellcore com>
I'm also curious about the value of co-location. Using a fast packet service (Frame Relay, SMDS, or ATM) allows your on-site router to communicate directly with a router of another ISP. There's no need to purchase another router to place at the co-location site. Why incur the additional cost?
To avoid having to use any of the fast packet services you mentioned? Or to allow you to use routers, which you know about, instead of being dependent on the random characteristics of switches the telephone company bought? Not using either of the last two fast packet services, in particular, will also yield 30% more useful bandwidth from a T3 circuit. This all by itself may make up for the co-location costs and the cost of a router. Dennis Ferguson
Current thread:
- value of co-location George H. Clapp (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Stephen Balbach (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Dennis Ferguson (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Jim Forster (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Dorian Kim (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Jim Forster (Jan 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: value of co-location Kent W. England (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Stephen Balbach (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Paul A Vixie (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Russ Pagenkopf (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Stephen Balbach (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Shikhar Bajaj (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Dorian Kim (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location postel (Jan 19)
- Re: value of co-location Mike O'Dell (Jan 20)
(Thread continues...)