North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: InterNAP?

  • From: David A. Snodgrass
  • Date: Mon Oct 30 19:07:34 2000

Its good in theory, But last time i looked into them, they still didnt have
very good connectivity to exodus and above etc. so, your traffic ends up
traversing their good cw and uunet links and the like, so to get to places
like exodus and above you are still crossing the PX's - Via other carriers,
not internap :)

But, i would have to say they would be one of my first options if i was
looking to develop a facility with only 1 single-homed link.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Johnson" <[email protected]>
To: "Tom Schmidt" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: InterNAP?

> Tom Schmidt [[email protected]] wrote:
> > InterNap has some technology to avoid congested peering points. Does
> > technology actually work?  Isn't it impossible to avoid these peering
> > points?  What are your experiences with InterNAP?
> I'm not a customer, but I spoke with a salesdriod there.  All they do
> is go in, set up their own geographicly disperse private peering points
> and link them together with their private backbone.  They set these
> things up by buying service from the other large backbone folk.  The
> idea being that, in general, if they can get their traffic onto the same
> backbone that the end user is connected to, then it's avoided the
> public peering points.  It's a good theory.  Dunno if it works.
> Mike
> --
> Mike Johnson
> Network Engineer / iSun Networks, Inc.
> Morrisville, NC
> All opinions are mine, not those of my employer