-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 1 dec 2008, at 15.08, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Dec 1, 2008, at 4:58 AM, Måns Nilsson wrote:
--On söndag, söndag 30 nov 2008 23.05.01 -0500 "Patrick W. Gilmore"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In Sweden, the reason to not choose NetNod (and to go with the
smaller
exchangepoints) is price and only price. No swedish ISP I know of has
stated that the fact that the Stokab fibre is bought by the IXP and
not the
ISP is a problem per se. Some might have a better wholesale deal than
NetNod has but that is still just about price.
I don't think any IXP can become a significant player on the
Internet today by only attracting participants from the country in
question. The Internet is not bound by political borders.
(Usually. :)
I am not trying to defend myself here, everyone is entitled to their
opinion on which IX model works better than another, but it might be
worth pointing something out in the history of Netnod. Because of the
fiber monopoly in Stockholm, that pre-dates the estblishment of any
neutral co-lo, the Swedish operators built their own datacenters.
Therefor, when NEtnod was established, there simply was no single
point where the operators could have established the switches. This
was *one* of the reasons the bunkers where chosen.
Best regards,
- - - kurtis -
- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkk0M9kACgkQAFdZ6xrc/t4oHgCgq1JRMxde9eWYchUyQvQgnITY
PnAAn1K6C5Lird6GWKuPqRSEFfKinjU9
=SA80
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkk0N4wACgkQAFdZ6xrc/t6OfgCgitw9i+PsfM76nc1UqxAfHNbj
PJUAn3jjtA2xQlH/r4LqsXr1KU+N3VVZ
=3QNe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
