I posted a thread recently about how no matter how good your host is, you still could be in trouble if the datacenter your host uses went under.

To take that a step further, you could have a great host, and a great datacenter; but if something happens to your datacenter's bandwidth provider(s), you are still in trouble.

Thus, the following question:
What Tier 1 or Tier2 bandwidth providers could or could not be in trouble in the near future?

I'll throw out a few that I've heard of, but feel free to mention others.

Genuity
Global Crossing
Yikes
Level 3
ATT
Sprint
Verio
Savis
UUNet

Yikes? I think you mean Yipes :)

To be honest, the future doesn't look bright for many telecomms companies. Many are laden with debt after extending / implementing their networks during the internet boom, and with current bandwidth prices, they are having a hard time bringing revenue in to reduce these debts.

It's pretty much a matter of whether banks will keep the companies going in some cases, if they pull the plug, then we will see more KPNQwest cases.

I used to host under the big boys roofs.. for quite a while.
I realized back in 1999-2000 that there were many issues
with them regarding billing and overall concern for how they
run their huge mega businesses.

I needed to move so I found locations where I can locate servers
without worry, locations that if financially sound would be a
excellent choice.

Carreirneutral locations like
ExchangeColo
http://www.exchangecolo.com

Typically carrier neutral locations like Exchange don't sell bandwidth.
I scouted numerous locations but Exchange was
the most solid. The floor above where we have our 600 servers
has AT&T and Pac Bell on it, and other phone companies. They
must have 20 million in equipment in there. They are also a
100 year old company with no worry about funds.

Carrier neutral locations must provide excellent fiber connectivity
with numerous companies. We found Cogent, Williams, Qwest,XO
and others right in the same building. We also opened a pipe to
PAIX for peering agreements.

Since we have our own IP's from Arin and do our own routing
we can open up agreements with these companies without
worry. As long as we are BGP with another provider we can
always go down with one.

I suggest anyone under the volatile roofs of Verio, Level3
and others to get out while you can. Carrier neutral is
a better business model and will help your negotiation abilities
as well.

I remember back in 1999 when I had to renegotiate a 100MB
pipe at Verio - San Ramon with over 50 servers in that one location
(I had 200 in another of theirs) how firm they were
on their pricing. I decided to call them back and act like
a new customer coming in. Not too surprisingly they were
40% cheaper for the "new customer".

I agree. Carrier neutral is the way to go. But an easier question would be what bandwidth provider isn't in trouble. Personally I think level3 and verio will survive.

Reliablehost:

<removed>.

maybe you need to re-read the forum rules.

off his site http://www.reliablehosting.com/

---
Server colocated off dual OC3 145MB Fiber optic connection (we have a 100MB connection)
-----
i thought an oc3 was 155mbit/s :)

<<removed>>

Originally posted by reliablehost
<<removed>>

Excuse us?

Maybe you should learn to read the forum rules as you're instructed to do before posting in such forums. You think it's a flame that you're told to read the forum rules?! Give me a break.

Also, he's pointing out the fact that what kind of data center can you run if you don't even know how much bandwidth capacity a oc3 has?! He's not making a comment on your non-updated network speed, he's making the point that an oc3 is 155mbps, not 145mbps :rolleyes:.

<<removed>>

exactly I was'nt pointing that out to try to be rude just exactly like he said wondering how you run a server hosting company and don't even know that an oc3 = 155mbit/s

sorry if I hurt your feelings its was'nt meant that way :)

Thanks, but we cater to the north american market, and our prices are signifigantly lower then your rates.

The fact still remains you continue to advertise in a non-advertising forum against the rules. Instead of attempting to make fun of another provider, why don't you go read the forum rules, go read your previous post, and then correct it?

BTW:

19 g50.ba01.b006469-0.mia01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.6.198) 158 ms 158 ms 159 ms
20 Ultranet.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.28.2) 158 ms 160 ms 159 ms
21 ns2.prioritycolocation.com (66.28.75.234) 160 ms 158 ms 159 ms

12 noname.calgate.net (209.17.65.54) 180 ms 179 ms 180 ms
13 svie.sfo-cr1.optigate.net (209.17.64.150) 180 ms 180 ms 180 ms
14 exchng-3.ph8.reliablehosting.com (216.131.81.3) 183 ms 195 ms 180 ms

---

24 g50.ba01.b006469-0.mia01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.6.198) 221.735 ms 225.365 ms 227.509 ms
25 Ultranet.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.28.2) 222.960 ms 222.080 ms 222.206 ms
26 ns2.prioritycolocation.com (66.28.75.234) 223.026 ms 223.332 ms 223.293 ms

16 snfcca1wcx1-optigate-gige.wcg.net (64.200.198.142) 190.639 ms 189.609 ms 190.295 ms
17 svie.sfo-cr1.optigate.net (209.17.64.150) 190.435 ms 190.452 ms 189.784 ms
18 exchng-3.ph8.reliablehosting.com (216.131.81.3) 189.454 ms 186.346 ms 186.970 ms

Your bgp4 is slower then our cogent from Germany it looks, and from hongkong the route is only marginally faster. If you choose to bash other hosts, at least pick ones that are after the same market share as you, and that you can compete with price wise, your prices seem to be at least 4 times ours.

Originally posted by porcupine
Thanks, but we cater to the north american market, and our prices are signifigantly lower then your rates.

The fact still remains you continue to advertise in a non-advertising forum against the rules. Instead of attempting to make fun of another provider, why don't you go read the forum rules, go read your previous post, and then correct it?

BTW:

19 g50.ba01.b006469-0.mia01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.6.198) 158 ms 158 ms 159 ms
20 Ultranet.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.28.2) 158 ms 160 ms 159 ms
21 ns2.prioritycolocation.com (66.28.75.234) 160 ms 158 ms 159 ms

12 noname.calgate.net (209.17.65.54) 180 ms 179 ms 180 ms
13 svie.sfo-cr1.optigate.net (209.17.64.150) 180 ms 180 ms 180 ms
14 exchng-3.ph8.reliablehosting.com (216.131.81.3) 183 ms 195 ms 180 ms

---

24 g50.ba01.b006469-0.mia01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.6.198) 221.735 ms 225.365 ms 227.509 ms
25 Ultranet.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.28.2) 222.960 ms 222.080 ms 222.206 ms
26 ns2.prioritycolocation.com (66.28.75.234) 223.026 ms 223.332 ms 223.293 ms

16 snfcca1wcx1-optigate-gige.wcg.net (64.200.198.142) 190.639 ms 189.609 ms 190.295 ms
17 svie.sfo-cr1.optigate.net (209.17.64.150) 190.435 ms 190.452 ms 189.784 ms
18 exchng-3.ph8.reliablehosting.com (216.131.81.3) 189.454 ms 186.346 ms 186.970 ms

Your bgp4 is slower then our cogent from Germany it looks, and from hongkong the route is only marginally faster. If you choose to bash other hosts, at least pick ones that are after the same market share as you, and that you can compete with price wise, your prices seem to be at least 4 times ours.

preech on Myles :)

<name spelled wrong>

<<removed>>

reliablehost, I don't know enough about networking to get into a discussion, but one thing for sure is that you need to edit out the self-advertisement reference in your post.

See the forum rules for details.

Peter

Reliablehost,

Go search the forums on our services, see what you find. No, we currently have williams dragging in, but we are growing. We offer a service that is in high demand, and people appreciate it. Not everyone has $500 and up for a dedicated server. Cogent does not just "go down for maintenance", like any provider they scheduele it.

And yes, they do maintenance occasionally, in small 5 minute windows, and yes, i've yet to hear a single complaint about this as it's schedueled a week in advance and customers get notification of such activities also.

Not sure if you think attempted :angry: flame on us might make you look better, or what rediculous :crap: you're trying to pull, but when you come down to the same market as us, then you can run your mouth, otherwise, it's pretty futile to compare apples to oranges.

<edit>Just thought i'd throw in, we do actually have bgp routed bandwidth available, which has been advertised, but is not one of our standard offerings at this point, as stated, not our target audience.</edit>

reliablehost: you are way out of line. This thread has nothing to do with prioritycolocation. If you have a beef with Myles, talk to him about it privately. No one wants you clogging up this thread with unrelated attacks.

can we get a mod please? this is getting lame and somone needs to **** out this guys hosts url or warn him or somthing

Easy guys, easy.

He is a new comer, it takes some time to adjust to a new place. No need to call for drastic measures. (at least not yet, unless he acts uncivilly)

Peter

Regarding dragging in Williams. This is interesting as the original post was regarding how Bandwidth providers are dropping left and right and how important it is to have "carrier neutral facilities"

My assumption is that you are not in a carrier neutral facility? In your location do you offer your customers a selction of backbones they can choose and contract with? Who is available in your facility should Cogent not make it?

Its hard to believe that 100% Cogent backbone carriers don't get complaints on their connectivity. Any research should show that their peering is extremely weak and must me fortified. We are constantly tuning for our customers.

But the more important question is what happens if Cogent does
go belly up, how long will it take you to drag in some more pipe?
I guess this leads back to the original post, go with a carrier
neutral company with multiple bandwidth providers already
in the location, and make sure thier IP's are portable if you
go under someone elses contract.

Also being that your main market is colo and mine is managed services you can see why the price difference is there.

Hey and I want to know how you find customers that only
have people going to their website from the USA? Most of
the people we host want to have fast access to their site
in all parts of the world.

Actually,

We are in a carrier neutral building, yes, we do offer selection of connectivity providers to customers should they require it, and we have 20-30 other carriers available in our building, and the other building down the street (properties owned by the same company which also retains fiber connects between the two).

We in fact do not get many complaints about our connectivity. People want good service, they want to be treated right, but they dont have a bank of money at their disposal, so they are well aware when they sign up for us what they get, and we go to great lengths to make sure they know what they'll get as you'll read on WHT, we simply do not have many negative reviews, because we dont like unhappy customers and strive to prevent people who will be unhappy with us from ever signing up, and we refer them to others who can help offer them the services they require which we may not offer.

If cogent goes belly up? We have an assortment of other providers to choose from, and i'm regularly assaulted on the phone by their sales representatives wanting to sell me bandwidth, i dont forsee a problem here.

And its easy to find people who have mostly US traffic going to their site, concentrate on local markets. As noted, our cogent only connection was faster then yours to parts of europe, and around the same speed as yours elsewhere, you find me the customer who can tell the difference between 120 and 140ms loading a webpage, and i'll bake you a pie and throw an apron on, because it's not humanly possible (sure in a game server it is, but not for loading webpages).

This is not a factor of a few ms, and you know how long 2-3 seconds more to load a page seems to a customer.

http://proxy1.syd.connect.com.au/cgi-bin/traceroute.cgi?prioritycolocation.com

traceroute to prioritycolocation.com (66.28.75.234), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 fastethernet9-0-0.bdr2.syd.connect.com.au (192.189.54.55) 1.233 ms 0.942 ms 0.729 ms
2 g2-0-2.sybr3.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.119.97) 1.031 ms 1.322 ms 1.104 ms
3 p4-4.pabr2.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.116.194) 157.709 ms 157.619 ms 158.026 ms
4 g0-0-0-0.pabr3.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.245.24) 158.081 ms 163.407 ms 158.261 ms
5 sl-st20-pa-6-3.sprintlink.net (144.223.243.17) 160.058 ms 159.902 ms 159.42 ms
6 sl-bb20-sj-8-3.sprintlink.net (144.232.20.43) 158.638 ms 158.269 ms 158.459 ms
7 sl-gw8-sj-9-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.3.110) 158.611 ms 158.577 ms 158.518 ms
8 sl-cogentcomm-7-0.sprintlink.net (144.228.110.122) 159.504 ms 159.355 ms 159.66 ms
9 p6-0.core01.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.145) 159.233 ms 159.38 ms 159.77 ms
10 p4-0.core01.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.94) 162.099 ms 162.444 ms 162.73 ms
11 p13-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.73) 254.539 ms 216.206 ms 171.908 ms
12 p5-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.78) 174.523 ms 175.352 ms 174.307 ms
13 p6-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.5) 205.519 ms 205.765 ms 205.252 ms
14 p15-0.core01.tpa01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.46) 333.452 ms 442.47 ms 236.762 ms
15 p5-0.core01.mia01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.57) 352.286 ms 399.3 ms 412.496 ms
16 g49.ba01.b006469-0.mia01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.6.194) 230.944 ms 230.426 ms 230.85 ms
17 Ultranet.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.28.2) 230.93 ms 231.295 ms 230.944 ms
18 ns2.prioritycolocation.com (66.28.75.234) 231.865 ms 231.255 ms 231.763 ms


Ours;
traceroute to reliablehosting.com (216.131.81.3), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 fastethernet9-0-0.bdr2.syd.connect.com.au (192.189.54.55) 1.235 ms 0.886 ms 0.791 ms
2 g2-0-2.sybr3.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.119.97) 1.218 ms 1.038 ms 1.082 ms
3 p4-4.pabr2.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.116.194) 157.901 ms 157.863 ms 157.681 ms
4 g0-0-0-0.pabr3.global-gateway.net.nz (202.50.245.24) 158.837 ms 158.383 ms 158.044 ms
5 * * *
6 exchng-3.ph8.reliablehosting.com (216.131.81.3) 159.285 ms 159.219 ms 159.5 ms


And the problem with Cogent is that they do go down for 3 hours on some maintenance windows, and that for my customers is unacceptable even with notice.

Let me ask you .. If you have other carriers then why do all your traces go through Cogent? And why not start doing some peering agreements. Peering agreements really improves the quality of connection speed for your customers. Take a look at New Zealand..

http://proxy1.syd.connect.com.au/cgi-bin/traceroute.cgi?reliablehosting.com 6 hops

http://proxy1.syd.connect.com.au/cgi-bin/traceroute.cgi?prioritycolocation.com 18 hops

That's a pretty good example on how optimization techniques
and peering agreements improves a network.

:)

It could be you are not in a area to actually peer, which is another factor anyone considering getting into the hosting business should consider. Exchangecolo is right next to PAIX and contracts can be opened rather cheaply with them.

Originally posted by chrisb
I posted a thread recently about how no matter how good your host is, you still could be in trouble if the datacenter your host uses went under.

To take that a step further, you could have a great host, and a great datacenter; but if something happens to your datacenter's bandwidth provider(s), you are still in trouble.

Thus, the following question:
What Tier 1 or Tier2 bandwidth providers could or could not be in trouble in the near future?

I'll throw out a few that I've heard of, but feel free to mention others.

Genuity
Global Crossing
Yikes
Level 3
ATT
Sprint
Verio
Savis
UUNet

Note thread topic...

Originally posted by reliablehost
This is not a factor of a few ms, and you know how long 2-3 seconds more to load a page seems to a customer.

And the problem with Cogent is that they do go down for 3 hours on some maintenance windows, and that for my customers is unacceptable even with notice.

Let me ask you .. If you have other carriers then why do all your traces go through Cogent? And why not start doing some peering agreements. Peering agreements really improves the quality of connection speed for your customers. Take a look at New Zealand..

It could be you are not in a area to actually peer, which is another factor anyone considering getting into the hosting business should consider. Exchangecolo is right next to PAIX and contracts can be opened rather cheaply with them.

Try the other ones you pasted, thats the only one i got results where your speed was even marginally faster then ours, some indicated your optimized speeds to be slower.

Cogent has never had a 3 hour downtime related to maintenance with us, not sure whta they do elsewhere, but they dont do it with us.

We are a small customer oriented company, and thats where we target, im sure peering arrangements work great for big companies, but when you push < 20mbps of bandwidth, most people wouldn't be too interested.

2-3 seconds more of load time would require a latency difference of 500+ ms, none of those are anywhere near there. As i stated before, it's all just comparing apples to oranges, im sure we could line you up with someone whose services are 7x what yours are, and tell you why their setup is better, if we had a customer base paying what your customers do, believe me, there would be a lot of changes, but thats not our market.

Finally, sorry chicken, hate to add more junk to the thread, but i think you'll agree it's fair enough that a host be able to defend themselves within reason :).

Originally posted by FDrive
reliablehost: you are way out of line. This thread has nothing to do with prioritycolocation. If you have a beef with Myles, talk to him about it privately. No one wants you clogging up this thread with unrelated attacks.
Why did you say beef :)? Now you've made me hungry for a nice big juicy double quarter pounder with cheese :).

Originally posted by romeo

Why did you say beef :)? Now you've made me hungry for a nice big juicy double quarter pounder with cheese :).

lol SOY burger :) j/k go get ya a burger :)

keeping in the thread..

I suggest that anyone looking to colocate under someones roof only go with carriers that are able to peer and hosting companies that are in Carrier Neutral Facilitues with Pipes ready and lit. Contracts and installations can take weeks to get pipes up. It also makes sense to make sure the pipes you buy
access to is fast world wide.

Most customers will not appreciate lag and sluggishness
for their European and Asian customers. It will effect their
sales and ultimately make you loose a customer. Also
ask them if their main pipe is backed up, prices are affordable
enough to get the best of both worlds now. Cheap.. and
realiable hosting.

More interesting reading here on choosing carriers;
http://www.networkmagazine.com/article/NMG20011102S0006

Actually, one time Cogent went down for us, router problem at Pihana Pacific in Los Angeles.

I called them and they had no idea about the problem. So I had to make them fix it. And they did, it was resolved within minutes :)

We have had more problems with UUnet / Worldcom and Cable & Wireless than with Cogent.