I think you're confusing "quality" with "locked into contract." If you have quality, being locked in with fixed rates and service is a good thing. If you don't have quality it's a bad thing.
Try real hard not to blame the provider, but the idiot who signed a contract that doesn't have performance guarantees. We [ACES Research] offer our clients contracts, and if they want to pay for performance guarantees, those too. None of them whine, so I assume they're happy and not upset. Some of them have locked rates till '98 that are just too good to mention.
This is a reasonable and appropriate response. The problem, I guess, is that the environment is young and people do not know what is reasonable to ask for in terms of service metrics, and service providers may not know what is reasonable to offer. Do you (or others) have suggestions about those, that could be used to address many of the concerns? We do not have to fix things 100%, I guess, but it would be nice to get to some high degree, rather than retaining status quo. Can we use them in the inter-ISP realm?
On Sat, 4 Nov 1995, Hans-Werner Braun wrote:
I think you're confusing "quality" with "locked into contract." If you have quality, being locked in with fixed rates and service is a good thing. If you don't have quality it's a bad thing.
Try real hard not to blame the provider, but the idiot who signed a contract that doesn't have performance guarantees. We [ACES Research] offer our clients contracts, and if they want to pay for performance guarantees, those too. None of them whine, so I assume they're happy and not upset. Some of
.... just saw this: how does ACES then guarantee, e.g., that abc.cd.com is reachable whitn certain quality parameters, when that site is overseas? Of course, if a customer wants it, I can always guarantee overseas reachability by buying a line, signing up abc.cd.com on the other side on my network, and have that used strictly by that customer. Redundancy too: other side around of the blue ball. No problem. But are we talking about this here? Mike
them have locked rates till '98 that are just too good to mention.
This is a reasonable and appropriate response. The problem, I guess, is that the environment is young and people do not know what is reasonable to ask for in terms of service metrics, and service providers may not know what is reasonable to offer. Do you (or others) have suggestions about those, that could be used to address many of the concerns? We do not have to fix things 100%, I guess, but it would be nice to get to some high degree, rather than retaining status quo. Can we use them in the inter-ISP realm?
---------------------------------------------------------- IDT Michael F. Nittmann --------- Senior Network Architect \ / (201) 928 1000 xt 500 ------- (201) 928 1888 FAX \ / mn@ios.com --- V IOS
On Sat, 4 Nov 1995, Hans-Werner Braun wrote:
Try real hard not to blame the provider, but the idiot who signed a contract that doesn't have performance guarantees. We [ACES Research] offer our clients contracts, and if they want to pay for performance guarantees, those too. None of them whine, so I assume they're happy and not upset. Some of
.... just saw this: how does ACES then guarantee, e.g., that abc.cd.com is reachable whitn certain quality parameters, when that site is overseas? Of course, if a customer wants it, I can always guarantee
Eh? Our customers understand what they're buying is THEIR connectivity, not someone else's. What we guarantee to those who pay for it is as follows: 1. We will deliver their packets to the next hop 100% of the time. 2. We will have no unannoucned outages. If we do, they are free of the contract and don't have to pay either. 3. We will contact other providers between us and an unreachable or packet-lossy destinations on their behalf 4. We will handle all appropriate technical matters. Think of this like you do from the phone company. You're buying connectivity to the network. If someone on the remote end has a busy signal, what you've bought is the RIGHT to find that out by having a connection go as far as possible. If the connection never gets to your local CO, then you have a poor service provider. If your service provider is too busy making graphical web pages and resting on their laurels while their routers go down, then you have a poor service provider. If your service provider is ignoring a 10% packet loss, then you have a poor service provider, etc... etc...
But are we talking about this here?
Mike
Ehud -- Ehud Gavron (EG76) gavron@Hearts.ACES.COM
On Sat, 4 Nov 1995, Ehud Gavron wrote:
On Sat, 4 Nov 1995, Hans-Werner Braun wrote:
...... just to make it shorter .....
Ehud
-- Ehud Gavron (EG76) gavron@Hearts.ACES.COM
this is what is in place with all providers. You guarantee a quality standard for the own networks. Just the user did not understand this. Mike ---------------------------------------------------------- IDT Michael F. Nittmann --------- Senior Network Architect \ / (201) 928 1000 xt 500 ------- (201) 928 1888 FAX \ / mn@ios.com --- V IOS
participants (3)
-
Ehud Gavron -
hwb＠upeksa.sdsc.edu -
Mike