On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brandon Ross" <bross@pobox.com>
Running a decent layer 3 service is "hard" too. Isn't the whole point to let these service providers compete with each other on the quality and cost of their services?
You could say the same thing about the uplink,
Which uplink is that? I'm a little confused.
My colo's uplinks to the world, which were one of three things I proposed offering at wholesale to ISPs.
I guess I missed that. You are saying that you would aggregate/resell transit bandwidth in your colo? I would argue against that as well. I'd suggest making sure your colo had adequate entrance facilities to allow whomever wants to provide upstream service there to show up, and allow them access to the fiber, which you already effectively have done.
though; I note you didn't throw a flag at that, or at Akamai; is the IPTV issue different to you?
If you were to open your colo to all comers that have similar models to Akamai, that seems fair. After all, it's not the city selling Akamai services to either the ISPs or end-users, the city is just providing a convenient way for the providers that are there to interconnect with content providers that care to show up.
Precisely. Akamai's business model is that they just show up? Me and my ISPs don't have to pay them?
I guess as far as putting an Akamai server in a colo/on an exchange, I assumed they didn't charge, but now that you mention it, I don't have first hand knowledge of that. I certainly would suggest that the city should not pay for anyone to show up at the colo, but allow them access if they care to do so on equal footing. Of course Akamai charges for their services, that's a bit different than just exchanging traffic. -- Brandon Ross Yahoo & AIM: BrandonNRoss +1-404-635-6667 ICQ: 2269442 Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/bross Skype: brandonross