Probably because you'll find that co-located web servers make the company more money than if they put their server in the same spot or on the same machine. Web sites for providers make them money, sure, but definitely not as much as if they hosted mtv.com or other popular sites. So, they put the high traffic sites where they need to be, and leave their own servers on another part of the network, as they probably are one of the least utilized machines there. This isn't in all cases, and blanket statements are dangerous. But, in the majority of cases I've seen, someone like UUNet's web site, or sprint's isn't nearly as busy as www.playbow.com, www.comedycentral.com, etc. Joe Shaw - jshaw@insync.net NetAdmin - Insync Internet Services "Learn more, and you will never starve." - Paraphrase of Lee On Mon, 30 Jun 1997, Ken Leland wrote:
Just out of curiosity, why do many (not all) of the large backbone providers establish their face to the web (their corporate webserver) on slow, badly positioned machines? I would have thought they would have chosen differently. We do, but we are not as sophisticated. I can see how Jack might have been confused, perhaps he is not so sophisticated also.
Ken Leland Monmouth Internet