At 11:34 PM 30-11-03 -0500, Deepak Jain wrote: After looking over numerous IRU contracts, I found one aspect lacking in all of them that we needed to add - duration. IRU contracts that I saw did not take into account the supplier going under or being bought out in regards to transfer of ownership of the IRU. I have sent you privately the language we used. -Hank
I am assuming this is on-topic, though the responses may not be. If there is interest, I will be glad to summarize the answers for the list.
I have been testing a few aspects of the market for DF, and I am assuming that for those that are capable of paying for it (DF) to guys who can provide contracts that are enforceable beyond 90 days after signing, a lot more complexity can be cooked into agreements today (2003) than before (1999) -- moreover, a lot more is known about what can go wrong with IRUs now than when they were first being bought. However, I am not seeing a lot of the agreements themselves changing... So I was wondering... For my purposes, I am considering hundreds and thousands of thread-miles, but I am sure even for small intracity spans, some of these things matter.
What terms do particular companies or does the community in general think need to be included above and beyond the standard IRU language most vendors are providing? Does anyone insist on fiber performance (beyond dB loss) for the entire life of the contract (if so, what other measures), maintenance/repair SLAs, mass-fusion performance on splices? Does anyone require lambda testing outside of 1550nm? Does anyone accept the payment terms proposed or do they take what they can get depending on the provider?
I am guessing only about 3 people are going to want to hear the results of this, so private email responses may be best.
Thanks in advance,
DJ