View Poll Results: As a customer, what network would you most like to see paired with Level(3)?

Voters
76. You may not vote on this poll
  • AT&T

    9 11.84%
  • Global Crossing

    14 18.42%
  • NTT/Verio

    13 17.11%
  • Qwest

    3 3.95%
  • Savvis

    9 11.84%
  • Sprint

    3 3.95%
  • Tata

    6 7.89%
  • TeliaSonera

    10 13.16%
  • Verizon Business

    9 11.84%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 59
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957

    Carrier Selection

    As we have been extending our private peering relationships across the US and Europe we are also looking to consolidate our carriers to simply Tier 1 and/or near Tier 1 providers. One of these providers will certainly be Level(3), but we are still not fully decided on other carriers.

    Now, what I am looking for here is, which network combination would most impress you as a customer/potential customer. I am not looking for price based analysis or analysis of dealing with a company's billing or support departments. I already have the data I need for those determinations. The point of this poll is solely to get end-user input as to overall network performance/reliability and how the network would compliment the existing carrier, Level(3). Please elaborate as to your decision in a post to the thread.

    Note: We have already done significant research, this poll is simply to help confirm research we have already done or to bring about items/issues we may have overlooked or not considered. Figured we'd take advantage of the knowledge of this community before making a final decision.
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sunny Florida (Orlando)
    Posts
    409
    I would personally like to see Level3/ATT/Savvis along with peering. Level3/ATT or Level3/Savvis plus peering would also be acceptable but the tri-bundle would be better
    Webby Enterprises LLC - AS63031
    Proudly Offering Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, VPS, Dedicated and Colo from Sunny Central Florida
    In the business since 1997!
    http://www.webbytech.net

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Quote Originally Posted by webtech View Post
    I would personally like to see Level3/ATT/Savvis along with peering. Level3/ATT or Level3/Savvis plus peering would also be acceptable but the tri-bundle would be better
    Why specifically AT&T and Savvis?
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Sunny Florida (Orlando)
    Posts
    409
    ATT due to Bellsouth/ATT/SBCGlobal DSL/Uverse users.

    I am on ATT DSL and to several Data Centers I take Level3 which ATT has a problem peering with, therefore causing issues.

    Savvis due to their presence and usage in the commercial world.

    I have always wanted to see what a ATT/Level3/Savvis network in Central US would preform.
    Webby Enterprises LLC - AS63031
    Proudly Offering Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, VPS, Dedicated and Colo from Sunny Central Florida
    In the business since 1997!
    http://www.webbytech.net

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    251
    I'd like to see Level3, ATT, and Global or Tata. Would give nice coverage in the US, and also excellent coverage in non north american networks via Global or Tata (or both). Unsure what your target market is, but it cant hurt to have good access to the large european, south american and asian markets. You could easily cut out ATT if you feel L3 gives you enough peering in north america.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ashburn VA, San Diego CA
    Posts
    4,615
    My vote is NTT so you have better reach to Asia. Honestly it's a crap shoot; Level3 is so well connected you aren't going to see much difference by adding any single carrier to it.
    Fast Serv Networks, LLC | AS29889 | DDOS Protected | Managed Cloud, Streaming, Dedicated Servers, Colo by-the-U
    Since 2003 - Ashburn VA + San Diego CA Datacenters

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    1,045
    No price barrier I would go with ATT/Verizon for domestic eyeballs and TATA for Europe/Asia. Tata is doing alot of expansion in the USA also I believe.
    » ReliableServers.com
    » Dedicated Servers | Colocation | VPS
    » 973-849-0535

  8. #8

    I agree with this statement

    Quote Originally Posted by FastServ View Post
    Level3 is so well connected you aren't going to see much difference by adding any single carrier to it.
    We are using Telia specifically for European market, but Level3 has a good presence too anyway (along with Cogent, which recently has expanded to Europe too).

    Looking for South American networks - again, Level 3 so far was the best (except NTT I think is providing Caribbean connectivity)

    In US, probably Internap will be the best (I don't think you have them on your list)
    Professional Streaming services - http://www.tulix.com - info at tulix.com
    Double optimized - AS36820) network, best for live streaming/VoIP/gaming
    The best quality network - AS7219

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Reston, VA
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by tulix View Post
    In US, probably Internap will be the best (I don't think you have them on your list)
    Internet isn't a tier1
    Yellow Fiber Networks
    http://www.yellowfiber.net : Managed Solutions - Colocation - Network Services IPv4/IPv6
    Ashburn/Denver/NYC/Dallas/Chicago Markets Served zak@yellowfiber.net

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Quote Originally Posted by Spudstr View Post
    Internet isn't a tier1
    Yeah, wouldn't the Internet itself be a Tier 0? :-)

    And yes, I know what you meant. :-)
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Reston, VA
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by KarlZimmer View Post
    Yeah, wouldn't the Internet itself be a Tier 0? :-)

    And yes, I know what you meant. :-)
    lol whoops, internap

    wow its been a looooong day.
    Yellow Fiber Networks
    http://www.yellowfiber.net : Managed Solutions - Colocation - Network Services IPv4/IPv6
    Ashburn/Denver/NYC/Dallas/Chicago Markets Served zak@yellowfiber.net

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    1,405
    Cogent all the way!
    Eleven2 Web Hosting - World-Wide Hosting, Done Right!
    Shared Hosting | Reseller Hosting | Dedicated | Virtual Premium Servers
    Server Locations in: Dallas | Los Angeles | Singapore | Amsterdam

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney-E2 View Post
    Cogent all the way!
    Sounds like you're just trying to feed the competition bad data, eh. :-)
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Reston, VA
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney-E2 View Post
    Cogent all the way!
    contrary to "marketing" data, cogent is still not a true tier1
    Yellow Fiber Networks
    http://www.yellowfiber.net : Managed Solutions - Colocation - Network Services IPv4/IPv6
    Ashburn/Denver/NYC/Dallas/Chicago Markets Served zak@yellowfiber.net

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Spudstr View Post
    contrary to "marketing" data, cogent is still not a true tier1
    Can you elaborate further on that please?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    43
    I would personally/strongly recommend TeliaSonera and then GBLX for carrier. They are the only ones capable of handling very large amount of data and holding a very good uptime!

    But, when it comes to $$$$ they might not be the cheapest solution. Therefore if budget is the issue I would recomment smaller (not fully) Tier1 operators such as Cogent!

    But then again the question is in which continent most of your traffic will be coming from, because geographically chosen large operators might be a good solution too.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,224
    I voted for Verizon only because of (a) the reach and peering of 701, even though it's not the venerable titan it once was, (b) the growing FIOS subscriber base, and (c) Verizon's large wireless network and the growth of web-enabled smartphones. VZ has a lot of eyeballs to reach.

    Otherwise, I would have chosen SAVVIS because my past experience with them was very good. They have some of the lowest latency in the business, at least for the destinations we were reaching. My primary complaint is a shortage of POPs in our region, and the only way to pick them up (at least in our area) is OCx, no Ethernet.
    Last edited by Sekweta; 10-04-2009 at 10:16 AM.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Reston, VA
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by pdw8 View Post
    Can you elaborate further on that please?
    true tier1's don't pay for peering. Cogent is not 100% settlement free, or maybe they are but no one can give a definate answer. Ask many network operators on NANOG and they will all contest that they are not.

    The wiki on tier1 still states that cogent still possibly pays for transit from L3 and/or sprint still.

    Digging into cogents public financials you could probably get the answer if dug deep enough. But cogents CEO is blowing so much smoke up investors asses to save the company its not even funny anymore.
    Yellow Fiber Networks
    http://www.yellowfiber.net : Managed Solutions - Colocation - Network Services IPv4/IPv6
    Ashburn/Denver/NYC/Dallas/Chicago Markets Served zak@yellowfiber.net

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,224
    Not picking nits with anyone specific, just floating this as a general question: does it really matter if a company is tier 1?

    I've had just as good, or better, service from non-tier 1 providers because they aren't dealing with the politics of (often overloaded) SFI peering links or disputes, or any of the number of problems that arise when two networks on equal footing suddenly start arguing which of them is king of the hill.

    When network A has paid transit with B, C, and D, then we know B, C, D have a financial interest in making sure A's traffic is delivered. Otherwise A votes with its wallet and buys transit elsewhere. In an SFI peering arrangement, then A, B, C, D have less vested interest in sinking off traffic from the other for free. It's done as a courtesy.

    Liken this to the hosting business. Who would get your priority support: a customer who pays $500/mo. for a server, or one who gets it for free under some barter arrangement? The answer is likely the one writing a check each month, even if you feel your barter deal is mutually beneficial.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    190
    This seems like a very odd opinion but I would say TATA (if you can reach a representative, they are hard to track down). TATA is one of the fastest growing backbone providers in the world and thus, has great international connectivity. If you are looking for better connections to say Asia and from what I have seen trend wise, a lot of people are looking for better connectivity to Asia from the US, then they are the way to go.

    I know you are out there in Chicago Karl which makes you in the perfect place to reach all of the US and quite frankly, most US providers will be sufficient for that, especially Level(3). But if you want to reach a growing market need which is fast transport to Asia, I would seriously consider TATA. A lot less hops from Chicago to Asia and India, that is for sure.

    I know this sounds like an advertisement for TATA and in no way am I or RRDC affiliated with them. Just have a strong opinion on this =D
    Peaktera - Infrastructure as a Service
    █ Denver - VPS Virtual Private Servers | Cloud | Dedicated Servers | IP Transit | Enterprise Services | Colocation
    Peaktera - www.Peaktera.com

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TX (home), CO (college)
    Posts
    385
    I put down NTT (a hop away from AT&T/SBCIS IIRC and Qwest and good to Asia) nowever Savvis tends to be good (SBCIS and CenturyTel backbones have a good amount of Savvis). Also TATA seems to be gaining a head of stream on global expansion.

    About Verizon, it's probably good to note that the FiOS service isn't pure 701...

    http://www.robtex.com/as/as19262.html
    http://fixedorbit.com/AS/19/AS19262.htm

    All that said, there's something to be said for a network that doesn't have to go to Denver to get to Dallas from Chicago (L3 is a prime example of this). I know GBLX has such a link and they're definitely a solid contender in the name space but I'm sure there are others.
    I see your bandwidth and raise you a gigabit
    Recommendations: MDDHosting shared, Virpus high-BW VPS, 100TB/SoftLayer for awesome servers

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by iansltx View Post
    About Verizon, it's probably good to note that the FiOS service isn't pure 701...
    That is correct, but the idea is 19262 is one AS away from 701 and the peering between the two is huge. Looking at traceroutes, you'd swear the two networks are one in the same.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    205
    what about PCCW, for asia customers?
    http://www.hostforasia.com
    █ Hosting Asia Networks with English & Chinese support
    █ Registered in Singapore RCB53117457C

  24. #24
    If it ain't broke don't fix it?

    Level3, Savvis, nLayer, PCCW, Telia--that really sucks

    What would be impressive though? Level3, Savvis, ATT, Verizon.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by litany View Post
    What would be impressive though? Level3, Savvis, ATT, Verizon.
    Impressive. And expensive. Everything I've heard about VZ suggests they are tough to get any decent pricing on, without going to a wholesaler.

    If the pricing was right, I can see value in a two-carrier mix of SAVVIS and InterNAP. InterNAP is a great way to get very close to several major carriers with one pipe. (Oddly, that was the business model of SAVVIS back in the 90's, before they got serious about their own backbone.)

    And you can probably get better pricing with a higher commit to InterNAP than trying to duplicate the same aggregate bandwidth with several carriers at lower commits.
    Last edited by Sekweta; 10-08-2009 at 02:37 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. VPS Selection
    By tera45863 in forum VPS Hosting
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-25-2009, 11:31 AM
  2. VPS selection
    By treo650 in forum VPS Hosting
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-16-2007, 11:21 AM
  3. Which Carrier Should We Add?
    By KarlZimmer in forum Other Reviews
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-25-2005, 10:17 AM
  4. Becoming a Carrier
    By Gibraltar in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-13-2002, 02:30 PM
  5. Help with Selection
    By ashben in forum Web Hosting
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-16-2001, 11:49 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •