Originally posted by Papa Smurff
Don't forget about the best darn DC in Cali... uh, besides Equinix.
Sfcolocation.com, how do I say?... awesome? I think so.
If you are judging facilities this place is in the top 5, hands down.

365 Main is *NICER* than Equinix.
The damn building is floated and seismicly isolated!
SFColocation leases space from 365main, and you can get a better deal if you go direct to 365 main...

Originally posted by ServeForce
365 Main is *NICER* than Equinix.
The damn building is floated and seismicly isolated!
SFColocation leases space from 365main, and you can get a better deal if you go direct to 365 main...


Large customers (as in 3+ cabinet) get a better deal going directly to 365 Main. Smaller customers do not.
365 is carrier neutral. So if you sign with 365 you have 2 options:

1. Order your own internet circuits and build your own multi-homed network by paying a few thousand a month.

2. Use a multi-homed ISP who is already in the building.... SFcolocation.

So you actually save more money by buying from SFcolocation because you would be buying directly from the ISP....

365 does not own or manage a network, they are in the business of selling large amounts of coloation space at wholesale prices to ISP's and large businesses.
The facility has (8) 10,000 sq ft colocation rooms for crying outloud. They make their money on the big boys.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
Large customers (as in 3+ cabinet) get a better deal going directly to 365 Main. Smaller customers do not.
365 is carrier neutral. So if you sign with 365 you have 2 options:

1. Order your own internet circuits and build your own multi-homed network by paying a few thousand a month.

2. Use a multi-homed ISP who is already in the building.... SFcolocation.

So you actually save more money by buying from SFcolocation because you would be buying directly from the ISP....


SFColocation *IS* an ISP...
And If you're not getting a better deal on cab's in the facility than with SFColocation, I guess you're missing out :)

I can get SINGLE cabinet pricing from 365 directly, thats lower than $700 a month from SFColocation...

Originally posted by Mfjp
I'm looking at the facility also now,
3) Doesn't offer metro transport or anything last I check (They may even be on XO fiber, but i'm totally unsure)


MFN owns their own fiber network, so they're definately not on XO fiber...

They don't sell metro themselves, but they do offer bandwidth in the facility.

I know who can do metro to the facility, if you're seriously looking, lemme know and I'll hand off some names.

Originally posted by Simpli-Erica
Their bandwidth is fine, but I wouldn't recommend their facility at 1019 Mission to anyone. I have been there... it is just scary.


I dunno, I asked the guys who run the place if they'd ever heard of you and they said no.
I would suggest seeing the place before passing judgement :)

And yes, 1019 Mission is not a pretty facility, but its absolutely functional, and they have several clients in there (one is even a fortune 500)

1019 Mission is not sold as a pretty facility, if you want cheap racks and bandwidth, hardly anyone can beat their pricing on racks+bw. However, its now 100% sold out, so they can't put any more people in it. How many ISP's in the bay area have SOLD OUT facilities, not many...


I heard they built a new datacenter on Federal Street and that the new datacenter is nicer.

You can pull their bandwidth into Exchange or others and be fine, though.


Exchange (200 Paul), or 250 Stockton, or 365 Main, or 1 Wilshire (LAX). They have a large California network, and are in several large carrier hotels. They are not dependant on any one facility...

60 Fed is their newest facility, and they can offer you some great deals. There were so many people waiting to sign up with them, that 60 Federal Street is almost sold out!

Originally posted by ServeForce
I dunno, I asked the guys who run the place if they'd ever heard of you and they said no.
I would suggest seeing the place before passing judgement :)

I did. One of their customers let me in.

I'm sorry, but I don't consider it a real datacenter.

-- They give every client APC battery backups. That is a joke. The power system should be reliable enough that you should be able to be properly laughed at for bringing one of those into the datacenter. Which do you think has more of a chance to fail, a $400 APC unit or a $2 million Hitec continuous power system with a 400HP diesel generator and an identical twin as its backup for full n+2 redundancy? Seriously. :rolleyes:
-- No raised flooring.
-- No 24/7 staffing. They give every customer a key to the front door. Security is incredibly lax there, and the front room (where there should be a person checking ID) sits completely empty.
-- As a woman, I would not feel safe walking in that district alone at night. I was there at night; fortunately, one of their customers escorted me.

The fact that I was able to walk in (with another customer) without identification scares me enough. That night, I could have run around the whole datacenter poking my hand through the cages and shutting all of their customers down. (All you would have to do is shut down the APC sitting at the bottom of each cage. It's ridiculous.)

Sure, the datacenter is cheap, but it's one of the worst ones I have ever seen. I'd prefer colocating at nearly every datacenter in the Bay Area (including the rather crappy one Simpli colocated in before we moved to AboveNet) over this one. Their bandwidth may be good -- like I said, you'd be fine if you pulled it into one of many carrier hotels such as Exchange -- but their datacenter at 1019 Mission is terrible.

-Erica

Originally posted by Simpli-Erica
They give every client APC battery backups. That is a joke. The power system should be reliable enough that you should be able to be properly laughed at for bringing one of those into the datacenter. Which do you think has more of a chance to fail, a $400 APC unit or a $2 million Hitec continuous power system


Seeing as how there have been 2-3 Datacenter fires with days of downtime due to faulty UPSes and Generators, I can't say that having one facility wide UPS is that much of a saving grace.


-- No raised flooring.


The original AboveNet SJ1 didn't have Raised flooring, big woo.
They still made it far.
Exchange Colo doesn't have raised flooring either.


-- No 24/7 staffing. They give every customer a key to the front door. Security is incredibly lax there, and the front room (where there should be a person checking ID) sits completely empty.


Perhaps you missed the part where I said "Its not pretty, but its functional"

All customers have locked cages or Cabinets.
If you're an open rack customer, you're just that, open rack.

The fact that every customer has a cardkey is also something you missed. If something happens while that customer is there, its not hard to find out what happened.
Believe it or not, but its nothing new to have un-escorted access to a datacenter...

I've even been to the AboveNet facility that you're in, and seen a similar scenario.


-- As a woman, I would not feel safe walking in that district alone at night. I was there at night; fortunately, one of their customers escorted me.

Sure, the datacenter is cheap, but it's one of the worst ones I have ever seen.

I dunno, have you ever seen UPNetworks?
The fact that they've had *SEVERAL* UPS fires and holes in the walls is enough to make me wonder.

I'm guessing you didn't see the leaky pipes in 365 Main either. When I was an AboveNet customer in the facility, I found water on the floor one day.

I'm also guessing you've never seen some of the East Coast colos, because several of them are in even less safe neighborhoods.

The fact that the 1019 Mission Datacenter has been there since 1996, with no major problems really says something.

However *NONE* of this has anything to do with the original topic of "Best and Reasonably Priced Colo"

They provide the best value for the money, hands down!

Originally posted by ServeForce
SFColocation *IS* an ISP...
And If you're not getting a better deal on cab's in the facility than with SFColocation, I guess you're missing out :)

I can get SINGLE cabinet pricing from 365 directly, thats lower than $700 a month from SFColocation...


I am a customer of 365 and SFcolocation.
The best and most reasonably priced data center on the west coast is the 365 Main facility. No other facility comes closer and you said it yourself when you said " it is nicer than Equinix" earlier in this thread.
You are being a little too judgemental and turning this thread into a personal tone.

Besides that your reasoning about resellers is not accurate.
Often resellers can sell at better prices. For example, Nokia phone resellers have deals with Nokia Inc, therefore they can buy for much less than someone going directly to Nokia.
Resellers would not exist if they could not offer better value than the manufacturer.
The fact that you got a quote for $700 cabinet does not mean that one can't get a better deal. Also, you failed to consider the total bottom line and what is included in that price. So unless you can provide us a detailed breakdown of services and prices between SFcolocation and 365 then you are making assumptions, which is bad business.

Besides that 365 Main is *NOT* an ISP, they are strictly a Data Center Provider who makes money on space sold.

This thread is colo+bandwidth. 365 does not do bandwidth because they are not an ISP. They do colo. SFcolocation does both.

MFN does own the fiber network, but that doesnt' imply they're on Fibers they lay. They could just have brought XO's Dark Fiber resulting in the same bundle of Fiber carrying the transit.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Seeing as how there have been 2-3 Datacenter fires with days of downtime due to faulty UPSes and Generators, I can't say that having one facility wide UPS is that much of a saving grace.


A facility wide UPS system is what the Pentagon and NATO use... ummm they have the largest budget in the entire country. Why don't you ask them why they don't use battery/generator UPS systems? They use a Hi-tec flywheel UPS system similar to 365/SFcolocation.

Sure, fires can knock alot of electrical stuff out. Transformers, generators, etc...
But consider this, no other data center on the west coast can boast of N+2 redundancy on everything except for 365.

Next.

Originally posted by Mfjp
MFN does own the fiber network, but that doesnt' imply they're on Fibers they lay. They could just have brought XO's Dark Fiber resulting in the same bundle of Fiber carrying the transit.

Uhm, hello, MFN used to *OWN* 365 Main :)
Of course the fiber going into the facility is theirs...

Originally posted by ServeForce
Uhm, hello, MFN used to *OWN* 365 Main :)
Of course the fiber going into the facility is theirs...

Oh yeah, you do have a point there. hahaha! I'm just stupid.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
Besides that your reasoning about resellers is not accurate.
The fact that you got a quote for $700 cabinet does not mean that one can't get a better deal. Also, you failed to consider the total bottom line and what is included in that price. So unless you can provide us a detailed breakdown of services and prices between SFcolocation and 365 then you are making assumptions, which is bad business.


Since this isn't an advertising forum, I can't post pricing. But If you go take a look at my Ad in the "Colo Offers" forum, you'll see what I mean.
I'm guessing you're paying a lot more...


This thread is colo+bandwidth. 365 does not do bandwidth because they are not an ISP. They do colo. SFcolocation does both.

SFColocation doesn't own their own facility, they resell 365 Main. As far as I can tell, they don't operate out of any other facilities.
They're technically not a colo provider, they're a colo reseller.

*********** has 3 facilities that they own and operate. *********** also operates an independant network, uses multiple fiber carriers, and buys transit in several locations. *********** has people who Resell their colocation space.

You're trying to compare apples and oranges.

BTW, I'm not taking this personally, I would just rather have this thread be a bit more accurate.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Since this isn't an advertising forum, I can't post pricing. But If you go take a look at my Ad in the "Colo Offers" forum, you'll see what I mean.
I'm guessing you're paying a lot more...

[B]

SFColocation doesn't own their own facility, they resell 365 Main. As far as I can tell, they don't operate out of any other facilities.
They're technically not a colo provider, they're a colo reseller.

*********** has 3 facilities that they own and operate. *********** also operates an independant network, uses multiple fiber carriers, and buys transit in several locations. *********** has people who Resell their colocation space.

You're trying to compare apples and oranges.

BTW, I'm not taking this personally, I would just rather have this thread be a bit more accurate.


Yes, I agree we are comparing apples to oranges.
SFcolocation does not own their own facility but they do own the network. In this case I don't know if SF or 365 qualify for best colo+bandwidth. But it looks like UL does.:)

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
A facility wide UPS system is what the Pentagon and NATO use... ummm they have the largest budget in the entire country. Why don't you ask them why they don't use battery/generator UPS systems? They use a Hi-tec flywheel UPS system similar to 365/SFcolocation.


Uhh, yeah, HiTec != Battery UPS
A HiTec is a Motor-Generator with a flywheel, there are no batteries in there anywhere.

Considering that MFN put 100 MILLION dollars into that facility and then declaring bankrupcy before finishing everything, I would expect nothing less :)


Sure, fires can knock alot of electrical stuff out. Transformers, generators, etc...
But consider this, no other data center on the west coast can boast of N+2 redundancy on everything except for 365.


No, I'm talking about fires caused by UPS systems...
But yes, 365 Main is an awesome facility, but up until recently, it was too expensive for most people to consider.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
Yes, I agree we are comparing apples to oranges.
SFcolocation does not own their own facility but they do own the network. In this case I don't know if SF or 365 qualify for best colo+bandwidth. But it looks like UL does.:)

Perhaps I took the thread title too literally, but that was really how I saw it.

Just speaking regionally, the only people who can really contest in this are:
MFN
HE
XO
TimeWarner
UL
C&W (if they stay open heh)
I think GX is in the running too, but I'm not sure they still sell colo around here.

I'm sure there have to be a few more, but those are the biggest ones.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Perhaps I took the thread title too literally, but that was really how I saw it.

Just speaking regionally, the only people who can really contest in this are:
MFN
HE
XO
TimeWarner
UL
C&W (if they stay open heh)
I think GX is in the running too, but I'm not sure they still sell colo around here.

I'm sure there have to be a few more, but those are the biggest ones.

Then you need to add:
Verio (yuck)
Qwest
SBC
ATT
Sprint
Level3

All the above own their own network and facilities.
Of the bunch I would have to say Level3 and MFN are the top for the SF Bay Area.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Seeing as how there have been 2-3 Datacenter fires with days of downtime due to faulty UPSes and Generators, I can't say that having one facility wide UPS is that much of a saving grace.

You know, there are some things Papa Smurff and I disagree on, but this is definitely not one of them.

He and I both wanted the same qualities in the datacenters we picked. We wanted full n+2 redundancy, and we wanted the datacenter we picked to be one of the best facilities around, hands down.

We both got what we wanted.

You will never hear me argue that 365 Main is a bad datacenter. I've talked with the facilities people at AboveNet who helped build it. I understand the thought and the engineering behind 365 Main, and I have to admit, it is impressive. Had it still been an AboveNet facility in April when Simpli went looking for a new colo, it would have been our choice, hands down. The only reason I chose not to colocate my company there was because I was unsure of the long-term stability of SFColocation (and didn't have any idea how to contact the real estate company that bought the building; at the time, they weren't advertising colo space available.)

Uhh, yeah, HiTec != Battery UPS
A HiTec is a Motor-Generator with a flywheel, there are no batteries in there anywhere.

Huh? :confused: He's not saying that it's equivalent to a UPS. He's saying the same thing I am -- that you don't need a UPS. If you take a tour of 365 Main or AboveNet SJC3 (as they have identical facilities systems), you'll quickly understand why you don't need a UPS with some of those powering your datacenter. If you have taken the tour, and you still feel that you need a UPS with those Hitec systems backing your datacenter, I suggest you take it again... and this time, bring along a facilities expert.

The fact that the 1019 Mission Datacenter has been there since 1996, with no major problems really says something.

You are joking, right? You must have a pretty short memory. Don't you remember when eXchange went down for 5 hours a couple months ago? 1019 Mission went down too. Why? Because 90% of their traffic runs through eXchange. It's not UL's fault that eXchange went down, but it is their fault for having a single point of failure and a backup line that couldn't handle the load. Datacenter problem? No, not really, but if your servers were hosted there, you went down anyway.

However *NONE* of this has anything to do with the original topic of "Best and Reasonably Priced Colo"

[United Layer] provide[s] the best value for the money, hands down!

Your own pricing would suggest otherwise. Through your company, 1 cabinet + 10Mbit is only $100 more at 365 Main. While United Layer may be cheaper, it is not the "best value" by any means. I am at a loss to say why anyone would pick United Layer over 365 Main, especially when the price differential on 10Mbit is that small.

-Erica

Originally posted by ServeForce
Uhm, hello, MFN used to *OWN* 365 Main :)
Of course the fiber going into the facility is theirs...

A little history folks - AboveNet was an independent company when they built-out most of their facilities.

As an indi, they chose bandwidth providers and fiber providers based on their own business needs.

After MFN bought AboveNet, they didn't go back and rip-out all the competing providers in their facilities.

Thus, one cannot make blanket assumptions about whether MFN provides the fiber/bandwidth into any AboveNet facility - that must be answered on a case-by-case basis.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
A facility wide UPS system is what the Pentagon and NATO use... ummm they have the largest budget in the entire country. Why don't you ask them why they don't use battery/generator UPS systems? They use a Hi-tec flywheel UPS system similar to 365/SFcolocation.

Sure, fires can knock alot of electrical stuff out. Transformers, generators, etc...
But consider this, no other data center on the west coast can boast of N+2 redundancy on everything except for 365.

Next.

The flywheel/generator setups are AboveNet are dual redundant. They don't have one "facilities-wide" system, they have two fully redundant setups load-sharing and backing up each other.

Originally posted by spiv
The flywheel/generator setups are AboveNet are dual redundant. They don't have one "facilities-wide" system, they have two fully redundant setups load-sharing and backing up each other.

I was referring to a "facility-wide UPS system" as a whole system that covers the entire facility. In other words, a system that protects the entire place, not just a cabinet or two.
The Uninterruptable Power Supply system that Abovenet and 365 uses is exactly what you said. I also mentioned that it was N+2 which means it is not a single system and actually has 2 backups.

Originally posted by spiv
A little history folks - AboveNet was an independent company when they built-out most of their facilities.

As an indi, they chose bandwidth providers and fiber providers based on their own business needs.

After MFN bought AboveNet, they didn't go back and rip-out all the competing providers in their facilities.

Thus, one cannot make blanket assumptions about whether MFN provides the fiber/bandwidth into any AboveNet facility - that must be answered on a case-by-case basis.

Yes. True.

Originally posted by spiv
A little history folks - AboveNet was an independent company when they built-out most of their facilities.

As an indi, they chose bandwidth providers and fiber providers based on their own business needs.


As MFN owned AboveNet at the time of Building out 365 Main, you can be quite sure as to who owns the fiber that MFN used to get into the building...

MFN also had a strategic advantage in building out to 365 Main, as they're at the foot of the Bay Bridge, where several carriers haul fiber under the SF Bay.

You could ask the network engineers who built the thing out, if they were still employed by MFN heh.

Originally posted by Simpli-Erica
You are joking, right? You must have a pretty short memory. Don't you remember when eXchange went down for 5 hours a couple months ago? 1019 Mission went down too. Why? Because 90% of their traffic runs through eXchange.


We were talking about power before...
Yes, Exchange did go down for 8 hours, that blew. I had several large customers in that facility, and they were all down.

***********'s LAX network and facilities stayed up so your numbers are innacurate. Granted that didn't help people in the bay area, but guess what,their network is growing and becoming more robust as they become more successful.


Your own pricing would suggest otherwise. Through your company, 1 cabinet + 10Mbit is only $100 more at 365 Main. While United Layer may be cheaper, it is not the "best value" by any means. I am at a loss to say why anyone would pick United Layer over 365 Main, especially when the price differential on 10Mbit is that small.


Why? Because some people are penny pinchers and don't care for all of the amenities the 365 Main has. Its also convenient for many who work/live/etc near there.

I can offer those deals at 365 Main because UL is doing some promos for the moment.
They want to help populate the 365 Main facility so that it can slow down the burn of VC money thats keeping the facility there.
The cost differential is the cost in the cabinet itself, BW cost is the same in any facility that they serve.

Originally posted by Simpli-Erica
Had it still been an AboveNet facility in April when Simpli went looking for a new colo, it would have been our choice, hands down. The only reason I chose not to colocate my company there was because I was unsure of the long-term stability of SFColocation (and didn't have any idea how to contact the real estate company that bought the building; at the time, they weren't advertising colo space available.)


Considering that MFN Got out of the facility around June/July of 2002, and that SFColocation didn't exist until April of 2003, thats probably a good call.

If you check out the WayBack Machine for Pacfic Business's website in Febuary, you'll notice that its pretty uh, sparse.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030214205751/http://www.pb-solutions.com/

Originally posted by ServeForce
Considering that MFN Got out of the facility around June/July of 2002, and that SFColocation didn't exist until April of 2003, thats probably a good call.

If you check out the WayBack Machine for Pacfic Business's website in Febuary, you'll notice that its pretty uh, sparse.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030214205751/http://www.pb-solutions.com/


ServeForce,
I can't say other colo providers web sites looked any better than the old PBS web site. Hell, I know fortune 500 companies with worse web sites and even more sparse information.
However, I can't disagree with you on the fact that 365 and SFcolocation were created to re-open the facility. This is true.
Consider business 101:
1. New divisions and companies are created everyday by larger companies. This does not mean the newly created entity is not viable. It was created for a reason. So a new company name means very little.
2. Large name companies with long histories go out of business or get bought everyday: United Airlines, Exodus, etc...

Basing your reasons on a date is futile. You should base your reasons on other things, for example: Market growth for that sector, business model, short term and long term trends, etc...

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
I can't say other colo providers web sites looked any better than the old PBS web site.
However, I can't disagree with you on the fact that 365 and SFcolocation were created to re-open the facility. This is true.


Unless you know something I don't, SFColocation has no relation to 365Main other than being a customer.

The fact that they don't have a presence at 200 Paul or any other carrier neutral facility, and that they didn't even mention that they do IP and resold colo pretty much means that they sprang up to seize an opportunity, possibly brought out of some buddy buddy negotiation.

Their Network is 7 months old,


Basing your reasons on a date is futile. You should base your reasons on other things, for example: Market growth for that sector, business model, short term and long term trends, etc...


The fact that PB was a nobody in febuary/etc, says that they haven't been in the business long.
Their Network is 7 months old...
How often to people on WHT get praised for being newbies?

Originally posted by ServeForce
Unless you know something I don't, SFColocation has no relation to 365Main other than being a customer.

The fact that they don't have a presence at 200 Paul or any other carrier neutral facility, and that they didn't even mention that they do IP and resold colo pretty much means that they sprang up to seize an opportunity, possibly brought out of some buddy buddy negotiation.

Their Network is 7 months old,

[B]

The fact that PB was a nobody in febuary/etc, says that they haven't been in the business long.
Their Network is 7 months old...
How often to people on WHT get praised for being newbies?

Yes, I know things you don't. SFcolocation is more than "just a customer" to 365. I am a customer of both. I know their relationship. You are not, so how can you.

Again, you are making assumptions. SFcolocation bought a block of IP's from ARIN 7 months ago. So yes, their ARIN IP block is 7 months old as well as the name SFcolocation. But this does not mean they have only been doing colo for 7 months... try since 1994 in Exodus under a different name.
Please do accurate homework before you draw conclusions.
This all goes back to my previous post about companies creating different names to accomplish goals and capitalize on situations.
This is how businesses work. Names and dates mean very little unless you are able to connect them to parents and former companies.
Also, look at the stock market, how many times are new companies praised there? Often. Just because a company does an IPO under a new name does not mean it has not been in business under different names for quite some time.

Your line of reasoning goes against the most basic of business principles. Sucessful decision makers don't follow dates they follow: Market growth for that sector, business model, short term and long term trends, etc...

This actually means the owners of SFcolocation and Pacific Business Solutions are savvy business people who understand the market sector they live in by taking advantage of an opportunity. Smart colo customers are, in turn, also taking advantage of this.

Competitors are losing business because they offer one of the best cost/performance ratios on the west coast. This is a fact.

ServeForce, don't hate, appreciate.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
So yes, their ARIN IP block is 7 months old as well as the name SFcolocation. But this does not mean they have only been doing colo for 7 months... try since 1994 in Exodus under a different name.
Please do accurate homework before you draw conclusions.

Well... not quite. SFColocation is owned by a single person. He partnered with PBS to offer colocation in 365 Main. Before he partnered with PBS, he worked for another colocation company as a salesperson and later as a network admin. He did not have any management or leadership roles within the company, though (as he willl tell you) he did refer several customers there (of course he did... he was a salesperson.)

I left that company in April 2003 and took one of their biggest customers with me. At the same time, another big customer of theirs defected to *********** (that's the company that showed me around 1019 Mission.) Once all three of us decided to leave that colocation company, he realized the writing was on the wall and jumped ship to form SFColocation. As far as I know, it's the first company he has owned, though I won't deny he's been in the industry for a while (I doubt it was as far back as 1994, but I can confirm that it was as far back as 2000 or earlier.)

HTH.

-Erica

Originally posted by Simpli-Erica
Well... not quite. SFColocation is owned by a single person. He partnered with PBS to offer colocation in 365 Main. Before he partnered with PBS, he worked for another colocation company as a salesperson and later as a network admin. He did not have any management or leadership roles within the company, though (as he willl tell you) he did refer several customers there (of course he did... he was a salesperson.)

I left that company in April 2003 and took one of their biggest customers with me. At the same time, another big customer of theirs defected to *********** (that's the company that showed me around 1019 Mission.) Once all three of us decided to leave that colocation company, he realized the writing was on the wall and jumped ship to form SFColocation. As far as I know, it's the first company he has owned, though I won't deny he's been in the industry for a while (I doubt it was as far back as 1994, but I can confirm that it was as far back as 2000 or earlier.)

HTH.

-Erica

Ok, well I'll shut up now.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
Yes, I know things you don't. SFcolocation is more than "just a customer" to 365. I am a customer of both. I know their relationship. You are not, so how can you.


Please explain how SFColocation is more than just a customer to 365 Main.
Sounds like an enormous conflict of interest to me...


Again, you are making assumptions. SFcolocation bought a block of IP's from ARIN 7 months ago. So yes, their ARIN IP block is 7 months old as well as the name SFcolocation. But this does not mean they have only been doing colo for 7 months... try since 1994 in Exodus under a different name.


Their ASN is also 7 months old.
The fact remains that they're a new business entity, and if they've really been in business since 1994, why would they want to lose that track record unless it wasn't good?
I have no problem being wrong in that assumption, but nowhere are the dots connected.
When you have a good track record, you want it to follow you.

*********** was started by some of the guys who started sirius.com way back in the day. They're proud of that record, and its not hard to find the connections.


Competitors are losing business because they offer one of the best cost/performance ratios on the west coast. This is a fact.


I'd actually be curious to see numbers on that, mostly because it would be good data to have to convince people to move to 365 Main.


ServeForce, don't hate, appreciate.

There is no hate, only business :)

Originally posted by ServeForce
Please explain how SFColocation is more than just a customer to 365 Main.
Sounds like an enormous conflict of interest to me...


Sounds like a working relationship to me. 365 provides the facility, SFcolocation provides the network. 365 sells space to big guys, SFcolocation sells to smaller guys. Looks like more than just a reseller relationship.

[/QUOTE]

[B]
Their ASN is also 7 months old.
The fact remains that they're a new business entity, and if they've really been in business since 1994, why would they want to lose that track record unless it wasn't good?
I have no problem being wrong in that assumption, but nowhere are the dots connected.
When you have a good track record, you want it to follow you.

*********** was started by some of the guys who started sirius.com way back in the day. They're proud of that record, and its not hard to find the connections.


You are still making assumptions as to why they did what they did. Could be for a number of reasons. For example: Stealth mode as they pursued the relationship with 365 so competitors wouldn't weasel in while they were doing so, legal reasons, tax reasons, liability reasons... doesn't mean they did it because they had a bad track record. Hell, sounds like they were being smart.



I'd actually be curious to see numbers on that, mostly because it would be good data to have to convince people to move to 365 Main.

There is no hate, only business :)

Evidence, how about the fact that they did a SAS70? How about the fact that their facility is N+2? How about the fact that their SAS70 exceeds FEMA standards and that no other facility on the west coast does? How about the fact that Federal Government agencies moving into 365, CNET, Raiders, Brightmail... you'll never catch any of these businesses or organizations in United Layer, Hurricane Electric or ColoServ.
Hey, fortune 500's do their homework and I'm sure that they *did* see the numbers. Anyone can get numbers simply by considering the design of the facility compared to others, the cost of colocating there and compare it to other, so called, colocation facilities. Hell, I can turn my garage into a competitor of United Layer, all I need to do is order some pipe and slap some racks in. It does not mean my garage will ever be a "Internet Data Center" per industry design standards.
Anyone can take a tour and see the difference is night and day. United Layer does not have a real data center, nor does Hurricane Electric. Their facilities are not built per industry standard for Internet Data Centers. Ask an expert.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
Sounds like a working relationship to me. 365 provides the facility, SFcolocation provides the network. 365 sells space to big guys, SFcolocation sells to smaller guys.


Uhh, thats exactly what a reseller is.
Perhaps you're missing the key fact that 365 Main is supposed to be CARRIER NEUTRAL.

The general definition of that is that the facility stays out of the business of running IP services...

SFColocation is nothing more than a customer of 365 Main.
Just as MFN, XO, and whomever else goes in are customers.

If there was anything more than that, it would be a large conflict of interest, and I think that there would be some contractual problems with some of the large carriers in the building...


You are still making assumptions as to why they did what they did. Could be for a number of reasons.


Go look at the wayback machine, you'll see they have the same crappy website for YEARS... If they had seen the demise of MFN's involvement in the facility that far back, I want to hire them as my own personal psychics :)

In doing more poking around, it appears that SFColocation sprung out of the ashes of UPNetworks here in San Francisco.
The same facility that had UPS Fires, Power Main Burnouts, and wasn't multihomed at several points in its existance.
I hope for your sake, that its only the network engineer from UPN that is involved in SFColo...


United Layer does not have a real data center, nor does Hurricane Electric. Their facilities are not built per industry standard for Internet Data Centers. Ask an expert.

While 1019 Mission street is not spiffy/etc, its still called home by parts of ICG, WorldCom, and SBC.
*********** also has several facilities, and I would suggest you see the rest of them before you continue to go on with this.
1019 Mission is only ONE of three facilities that *********** owns and operates...

Originally posted by ServeForce

[QUOTE]
Uhh, thats exactly what a reseller is.
Perhaps you're missing the key fact that 365 Main is supposed to be CARRIER NEUTRAL.

The general definition of that is that the facility stays out of the business of running IP services...

SFColocation is nothing more than a customer of 365 Main.
Just as MFN, XO, and whomever else goes in are customers.

If there was anything more than that, it would be a large conflict of interest, and I think that there would be some contractual problems with some of the large carriers in the building...

A reseller of the colo space, not a reseller of network services. A colocation customer, not a network customer. Please clarify. Also, how would you know if it is a conflict of interest if you do not know the particulars of their relationship. They could structured a business relationship in such a way that so there is not a conflict. They could even be partners. I don't know. But Again, you are making sweeping assumptions without knowing the particulars. So why speculate or jump to conclusions?




Go look at the wayback machine, you'll see they have the same crappy website for YEARS... If they had seen the demise of MFN's involvement in the facility that far back, I want to hire them as my own personal psychics :)


Speculation once more, no supporting facts. Who said they told the future? They just saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. It doesn't take a fortune teller to make prudent business decisions. Their website was updated after they moved into 365.
Besides, perhaps you should have hired them as your personal psychics, then *you* would have been the one with a network built into 365 getting good business in a superior facility :)


In doing more poking around, it appears that SFColocation sprung out of the ashes of UPNetworks here in San Francisco.
The same facility that had UPS Fires, Power Main Burnouts, and wasn't multihomed at several points in its existance.
I hope for your sake, that its only the network engineer from UPN that is involved in SFColo...

Again, a smart business decision for the owner of SFcolocation. UPNetworks is still in existence and still has those problems, not to mention their IP space is all blacklisted on SPEWS and their customers are streaming out the door to competitors. If UPNetworks has all these problems then it would make sense that someone from there would leave to a better place. Is UPNetworks still connected to the persons or person that left? If no then your comment makes no sense. If yes then your comment is valid.


While 1019 Mission street is not spiffy/etc, its still called home by parts of ICG, WorldCom, and SBC.
*********** also has several facilities, and I would suggest you see the rest of them before you continue to go on with this.
1019 Mission is only ONE of three facilities that *********** owns and operates...

Sorry, but WorldCom and SBC do not call UL home. SBC and WorldCom do not rely on UL for anything. UL relies on them. Again, UL may own and operate space but all of the space UL operates is nowhere near the level of Abovenet, 365 Main, Level3, etc.. Internet Data Centers. Since this thread is "best reasonably priced colo+bandwidth" UL cannot qualify nor can ColoServ, nor can UPNetworks, nor can Hurricane Electric. They simply are not real data centers and the word "best" does not apply to them.

I encourage anyone to take a tour and compare.

Entertaining thread? I think so. We can go on forever.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
A reseller of the colo space, not a reseller of network services. A colocation customer, not a network customer. Please clarify. Also, how would you know if it is a conflict of interest if you do not know the particulars of their relationship.


Thats why I'm asking you, since you claim to know more :)
If 365 Main has anything more than a Vendor -> Customer Relationship with PB, then something improper is going on.


They could structured a business relationship in such a way that so there is not a conflict. They could even be partners. I don't know. But Again, you are making sweeping assumptions without knowing the particulars. So why speculate or jump to conclusions?


I'm only speculating because you're not divulging if you know any of the particulars :)


Is UPNetworks still connected to the persons or person that left? If no then your comment makes no sense. If yes then your comment is valid.


See, you're slowly starting to see my connections/etc.
If SFColocation is merely a side-project of UPNetworks, be afraid.
If SFColocation is just some guy who started up something to get the hell out of UPNetworks, power to him.

Either way its a new business entity, with no track record, and no apparent history.

Google for them, there's nothing there.
I can't find anything pertaining to their history on their website, wheras its clear as day on the UL website:
http://www.***********.com/aboutus.html

Easy to find info about 365 Main:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030922/sfm049_1.html


Sorry, but WorldCom and SBC do not call UL home. SBC and WorldCom do not rely on UL for anything.


When you see their pop's downstairs at 1019 Mission Street, you are free to correct your erroneous statement :)


Again, UL may own and operate space but all of the space UL operates is nowhere near the level of Abovenet, 365 Main, Level3, etc.. Internet Data Centers. Since this thread is "best reasonably priced colo+bandwidth" UL cannot qualify nor can ColoServ, nor can UPNetworks, nor can Hurricane Electric. They simply are not real data centers and the word "best" does not apply to them.


I have never claimed that 1019 Mission is anywhere near the quality of 365 Main, or a world class datacenter.
It is a datacenter, and it provides a good value for the customers in it.
Obviously the facility wouldn't be sold out if it was as crappy as you claim :)

Best, probably not, but the pricing is absolutely way more competitive than almost anyone else in San Francisco.

And you're still ignoring the fact that *********** also has 60 Federal Street in SF, a Building that also houses a Qwest Datacenter, an ICG Pop, and a couple other smaller providers.

That Facility is fairly full, and they're looking at lighting another datacenter in SF as well.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Thats why I'm asking you, since you claim to know more :)
If 365 Main has anything more than a Vendor -> Customer Relationship with PB, then something improper is going on.

You are trying to establish that something improper is going on. Unless you have evidence you are speculating. I do not have evidence, nor do you. Do you have a copy of the contracts and legal documents executed between 365 and SFcolocation? What if they do specify a partnership type of relationship? We don't know so you can't keep pushing a unsupported point that there is conflict or improper stuff. It is not wise to make unsupported accusations in public.

Originally posted by ServeForce


I'm only speculating because you're not divulging if you know any of the particulars :)

[B]

See, you're slowly starting to see my connections/etc.
If SFColocation is merely a side-project of UPNetworks, be afraid.
If SFColocation is just some guy who started up something to get the hell out of UPNetworks, power to him.

Either way its a new business entity, with no track record, and no apparent history.

Google for them, there's nothing there.
I can't find anything pertaining to their history on their website, wheras its clear as day on the UL website:
http://www.***********.com/aboutus.html

Easy to find info about 365 Main:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030922/sfm049_1.html



Again, speculation. IF there was someone or a portion of UPNnetworks that left to start something new, how do you not know that *UPNetworks* was actually a side project for them? Perhaps that person or group is involved in many successful companies. If this is the case, then perhaps UPNetworks asked a person or group to help them get started because that person or group had a proven track record. Hell, just because one of the Big 5 consulting firms comes in to help a company doesn't mean the consulting company is no good. Again, you nor I know the particulars nor the complexity of what happened. Maybe it was complex, maybe it wasn't. But the fact still remains: SFcolocation and 365 offer the best colo+bandwidth for the price.
A new name means nothing in business.
"Your line of reasoning goes against the most basic of business principles. Sucessful decision makers don't follow dates nor new company names, they follow: Market growth for that sector, business model, short term and long term trends, etc..."
Smart decision makers look beyond names and dates. If they didn't you would have been stuck with United Airlines while the company tanked.

Originally posted by ServeForce


When you see their pop's downstairs at 1019 Mission Street, you are free to correct your erroneous statement :)

I can get SBC to build a POP (Point of Presense) in my garage. It does not mean SBC relies on my garage. The only reason providers build POP's is to service ordered circuits. So all this means is that UL orderd some circuits and SBC installed a terminal. SBC and whoever else has a POP in United Layer also probably piggy-backs on those for convenience sake. Nothing to get too excited about. Every large building in San Francisco has a SBC, MCI, Sprint or ATT POP in it. How else do you think that get the phone and internet lines into the building?

Originally posted by ServeForce


I have never claimed that 1019 Mission is anywhere near the quality of 365 Main, or a world class datacenter.
It is a datacenter, and it provides a good value for the customers in it.
Obviously the facility wouldn't be sold out if it was as crappy as you claim :)

Best, probably not, but the pricing is absolutely way more competitive than almost anyone else in San Francisco.

And you're still ignoring the fact that *********** also has 60 Federal Street in SF, a Building that also houses a Qwest Datacenter, an ICG Pop, and a couple other smaller providers.

That Facility is fairly full, and they're looking at lighting another datacenter in SF as well.

The only reason United Layer, HE and all those other sub-standard facilities are filled out is becuse customers had nowhere else to go in the San Francisco Area. Look at UPNetworks, you just told us horror stories about them. I bet they have customers too. The fact of the matter is that there are no real data centers in SF besides Level3 and 365. Level3 wants a $5k minimum commitment from customers. 365 was not open 1 year ago. So where did that leave 90% of the rest of us? Nowhere to go but United Layer or Hurricane. Now that 365 is open and SFcolocation providing colo and ISP in the facility everyone is starting to move out of UPNetworks, Hurricane, United Layer, etc.. because they know 365 and SFcolocation give the best facility and network for a very reasonable price. If your business depends on the internet and you have a choice between United Layer, SFcolocation and Hurricane Electric, you are going to pay 10% more and go with SFcolocation to be in the best. You know this.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
You are trying to establish that something improper is going on. Unless you have evidence you are speculating. I do not have evidence, nor do you. Do you have a copy of the contracts and legal documents executed between 365 and SFcolocation? What if they do specify a partnership type of relationship? We don't know so you can't keep pushing a unsupported point that there is conflict or improper stuff. It is not wise to make unsupported accusations in public.


Dood, YOU are the one who has been saying that there is more than a Vendor -> Customer relationship going on!!!!
This is nuts!


I can get SBC to build a POP (Point of Presense) in my garage. It does not mean SBC relies on my garage. The only reason providers build POP's is to service ordered circuits.


Actually, it does mean that SBC relies on your garage.
SBC will provision circuits out of your garage since it (for some reason) has chosen to build into your garage.
SBC does not do this for 1-2 circuits ordered.
You do not get an OC48 and several Fiber/DS3/T1 muxes installed for a few circuits...


The only reason United Layer, HE and all those other sub-standard facilities are filled out is becuse customers had nowhere else to go in the San Francisco Area.


This is 100% not true, and you know it.
200 Paul has been around forever.
People are not leaving 1019Mission or 60Federal street to go to 365 Main.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Dood, YOU are the one who has been saying that there is more than a Vendor -> Customer relationship going on!!!!
This is nuts!

Now you have just hung yourself. Providers who build into facilities are not customers of the facility. SBC, a provider, builds a POP (Point of Presence) into 1019 Mission St. So who is the customer? The 1019 Mission building or the customers inside and outside the building who get connectivity from the provider? SBC does not have a vendor/customer relationship with facilities it builds into. Likewise, SFcolocation built a POP into 365. Who is the customer? Not 365, but those inside and outside 365 who use SFcolocation. As you mentioned before, this is called CARRIER NEUTRAL. In carrier neutral models, providers are not customers of the facility. They only have POP's in the facility. This is not a vendor/customer relationship. This is more of a partnership between the provider and facility in order to provide connectivity to those in and around the building. The facility benefits by having the providers build in as this attracts customers.
So there is no vendor/customer relationship between providers and facilities. It is much more, like a co-op.
Originally posted by ServeForce


Actually, it does mean that SBC relies on your garage.
SBC will provision circuits out of your garage since it (for some reason) has chosen to build into your garage.
SBC does not do this for 1-2 circuits ordered.
You do not get an OC48 and several Fiber/DS3/T1 muxes installed for a few circuits...

[B]

This is 100% not true, and you know it.
200 Paul has been around forever.
People are not leaving 1019Mission or 60Federal street to go to 365 Main.

1. A POP does not mean an OC48. A POP simply means "Point of Presence". I've seen SBC, MCI, Sprint, etc... build POP's into highrise buildings only to service some phone lines, no T1's included. Just because UL has a POP or two means diddle. If the POP is lost or disconnected the provider can service everyone from other POP locations.

2. You want the truth? Ask someone why they moved into 200 Paul. They will tell you because it was the only real option at the time. Customers from United Layer, Hurricane, ColoServ, etc.. are moving into 365 each month. So called competitors will soon be out of business because they connot compete with cost/performance ratio of SFcolocation/365. 200 Paul is the same story as 365. Colo.com built 200 Paul, it went under, turned into ExChange Colo, customers moved in because Level3 was too expensive and 200 Paul was the only other half decent facility. Now that 365/SFcolocation is open businesses will have a better option than 200 Paul and Level3 at a great price. You know it's true and you are fighting the fact that 200 Paul, United Layer, NaviSite and Level3 are up for stiff competition from 365/SFcolocation now that customers have a far superior option... supported by facts.

Originally posted by Papa Smurff
SBC, a provider, builds a POP (Point of Presence) into 1019 Mission St. So who is the customer? The 1019 Mission building or the customers inside and outside the building who get connectivity from the provider? SBC does not have a vendor/customer relationship with facilities it builds into.


Dood, what you smoking?
There are hundreds of T1's (voice and data) being run out of the SBC pop at 1019.
They are not for ***********, or their customers.

MCI and ICG also have T1 pop's in the building, and they haul in copper from the street to connect to customers that are outside of 1019M.

They pay for use of that space.
I'm sure I could get someone to show you their check :)


Likewise, SFcolocation built a POP into 365. Who is the customer? Not 365, but those inside and outside 365 who use SFcolocation.


Actually, once you are a customer of SFColocation, you are not a direct customer of 365 Main.
If thats not obvious, you should probably ask SFColocation :)


As you mentioned before, this is called CARRIER NEUTRAL. In carrier neutral models, providers are not customers of the facility.


Providers are *ABSOLUTELY* customers of a facility.
Its fairly clear that you don't know the industry well at all, if you assume that all carriers get their space for free.
Consider Wiltel at 200 Paul.
They have a floor for themselves, with megawatts of power.
Call up 200 Paul and ask if they're not a customer of the facility...


1. A POP does not mean an OC48. A POP simply means "Point of Presence". I've seen SBC, MCI, Sprint, etc... build POP's into highrise buildings only to service some phone lines, no T1's included.


When I go downstairs at 1019, and look at the Nortel Box thats sitting in the 23inch telco cabinet that has SBC/PacificBell slapped on it, I see OC48 on the interface cards in it.
Please restrict your comments to facts that you know.
Its obvious that you know nothing about this facility.


2. You want the truth? Ask someone why they moved into 200 Paul. They will tell you because it was the only real option at the time. Customers from United Layer, Hurricane, ColoServ, etc.. are moving into 365 each month.


I only know of one customer with *********** thats also at 365, and thats because he added equipment and wanted to show off 365 Main to investors.
All of his real gear is at 1019.


200 Paul is the same story as 365. Colo.com built 200 Paul, it went under, turned into ExChange Colo, customers moved in because Level3 was too expensive and 200 Paul was the only other half decent facility.


200 Paul has never been a colo.com facility. Cambay Telecom bought the building after it was a MACYS WAREHOUSE. If you want to ask them, I can give you their number.

I think at this point you probably want to throw in the towel before you make any more random generalizations or incorrect statements about facilities or businesses that you know nothing about.

Originally posted by ServeForce
Dood, what you smoking?
There are hundreds of T1's (voice and data) being run out of the SBC pop at 1019.
They are not for ***********, or their customers.

MCI and ICG also have T1 pop's in the building, and they haul in copper from the street to connect to customers that are outside of 1019M.

They pay for use of that space.
I'm sure I could get someone to show you their check :)

If providers pay the facility then indeed they are customers of the facility. Not all providers pay facilities. Does Sprint pay anyone to place their POP in the basement of the Bank of America building? Is Sprint a customer of Bank of America in this situation? Probably not. I am not the one who is smoking. You keep making blanket statements and keep failing to consider particulars of situations and relationships. One rule does not apply to every provider/facility relationship. But you keep arguing it does. Please be more objective and stop drawing conclusions based on a experience or two with a provider/facility relationship.
Originally posted by ServeForce


Actually, once you are a customer of SFColocation, you are not a direct customer of 365 Main.
If thats not obvious, you should probably ask SFColocation :)

This is not true. There are customers in the facility that have signed with 365 for colocation only and the provider for network only. Thus, the customer cuts two seperate checks, one to 365, one to the provider. Hence, a direct customer of 365 and provider. The only thing that's obvious here is your continued blanket statements with no supporting evidence.:)


Originally posted by ServeForce

Providers are *ABSOLUTELY* customers of a facility.
Its fairly clear that you don't know the industry well at all, if you assume that all carriers get their space for free.
Consider Wiltel at 200 Paul.
They have a floor for themselves, with megawatts of power.
Call up 200 Paul and ask if they're not a customer of the facility...


I didn't say "ALL" providers get free space. You keep making blanket statements without considering the particulars of the situation or relationship. Just for your own knowledge, JMA wired at 360 Spear Street in SF gives FREE SPACE to providers and even free cabinets. Why on earth would they do that? Because the more providers that build into the facility the more customers they can attract. Of course, there must be some kind of limit as to how much free space is given to providers otherwise it would not make sense. All this goes back to the industry statement you made earlier. I certainly know the industry better than most and I understand that provider/facility relationships are mutually beneficial on some levels and can often get very complicated. So no sense in making blanket statements.
Truly understanding the "industry" is understanding that nothing is as straight forward as it seems.

Originally posted by ServeForce
[B]

When I go downstairs at 1019, and look at the Nortel Box thats sitting in the 23inch telco cabinet that has SBC/PacificBell slapped on it, I see OC48 on the interface cards in it.
Please restrict your comments to facts that you know.
Its obvious that you know nothing about this facility.

I said "A POP does not mean an OC48". This is true. I did not say "A POP is NOT an OC48". A POP can be any device that a provider uses to provide service within an area. Again, POP means Point of Presence, not OC48 of presence. A POP can be a plain phone switch, OC3 MUX, OC12 MUX, OC48 MUX, a router, a switch, a antenna, a satellite dish, whatever is used to distribute a providers service. You misapplied what I said earlier. Please do not respond if you are going to misapply what people write. It only creates invalid responses.

Originally posted by ServeForce

I only know of one customer with *********** thats also at 365, and thats because he added equipment and wanted to show off 365 Main to investors.
All of his real gear is at 1019.

Good for him. Smart decision. As I said, customers are leaving United Layer and going to SFcolocation/365. So if this customer of United Layer moved gear to 365 so they could "show off 365 to investors" this supports the fact that SFcolocation/365 is solid and reliable. Don't you think their investors will scrutinize the facility and providers they use? Sounds like this customer made a good business decision based on research and moved their important stuff into SFcolocation/365. It's only a matter of time before they move everything out of UL. Maybe they are waiting for the UL contract to expire before they move the rest out. Who knows. I know from experience that this is how customers begin to migrate. First they move a server or two, then the whole thing.

Originally posted by ServeForce
[B]

200 Paul has never been a colo.com facility. Cambay Telecom bought the building after it was a MACYS WAREHOUSE. If you want to ask them, I can give you their number.

You are right. My mistake. COLO.com did the 650 Townsend facility
http://www.southlandind.com/WhatWeDo/Projects/project_detail.html?id=44
http://www.hdrinc.com/information/search.asp?PageID=1465


Originally posted by ServeForce
I think at this point you probably want to throw in the towel before you make any more random generalizations or incorrect statements about facilities or businesses that you know nothing about.
Thanks for the concern. But you are the one who needs to quit. You really need to be more objective and stop making sweeping statements. Sometimes things are not as they seem, even if it looks like it's striaght forward. There could be any number of reasons or circumstances that could invalidate a conclusion or statement, especially if you don't know all the particulars.:)

Posts were split from another thread.