Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Tier-1 without their own backbone?
From: David Diaz <techlist () smoton net>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:53:58 -0400

I guess it depends on your traffic type and destination. Level 3 has a lot of connectivity to content providers such as yahoo and microsoft. As Joel P pointed out they have been a reliable backbone with a lot of capacity.

They also have knowledgeable peering people although they lean towards the restrictive side on policy (starting about a 18 months ago)


At 12:32 -0700 8/27/03, Rick Ernst wrote:
We are sending out feelers for adding an additional DS-3, or possibly frac
OC-3.  One of the responses came back with "we won't be competive with
<provider> because they don't have their own backbone.

Is there a cross-reference for provider vs network backbone, or is this just
something that we have to ask each provider for?  I "assume" that UU, Sprint,
and AT&T are self-owned backbones, but others... ?

One of the providers we are looking at is Level-3.  Any comments good/bad on
reliability and clue?  We already have UU, Sprint, and AT&T.  I also realize
that the "they suck less" list changes continuously... :)


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]