Re: Automated DLR conflict detection

["Peter Galbavy" <peter.galbavy () knowtion net>]

You misunderstand. Which operators will offer this (backed by some
underwritten insurance) in an effort to be better than the competition ?

Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc Pierrat" <marc () sunchar com>
To: <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: Automated DLR conflict detection




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
Peter Galbavy
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 5:47 AM
To: Sean Donelan; nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: Automated DLR conflict detection

> On many occasions in my prior life at Demon Internet we laughed sales
people
> out of meetings when they offered SLAs that were limited to the value of a
> months service. But, in the end *all* the salepeople offered the same deal.
> Until when SLAs come with a pay back greater than the cost of the contract,
> and in fact cover consequential losses, most service providers will treat
> the failure to deliver within the SLA as a risk associated with the service
> and not something more serious.

However: Would you (or anyone in the group) be willing to pay a premium for
that, and how much is a "real" SLA, one covering consequential losses, worth
to you?

Marc Pierrat
marc () sunchar com
www.sunchar.com