Re: NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing?

["Will Hargrave" <will () harg net>]

On 17 Jun 2016, at 1:15, Daniel Golding wrote:

> You said that LONAP's distributed strategy "kept datacenters honest" 
> to use
> your exact quote. That implied some sort of benefit for members in 
> acting
> as some sort of counterweight to (rapacious?) data center providers.

I rely primarily on information from our membership base who reaffirm 
their desire for a multi-site approach. They (and you) are the people 
with the data, as they are the people buying these services.

The origin of these designs was probably not out of a desire for 
diversity to promote competition, but actually because existing 
datacentres were full.
Nevertheless, a datacentre which is full, incompetently run, or too 
expensive all have something in common - to my members they are useless.

> I made the point that distributed IX's don't really
> impact power or space costs in data centers. I can provide actual data 
> on
> this, if you would like.

What about crossconnect prices?

It is interesting you have data that indicates that this policy could be 
futile, because the belief in this principle is almost axiomatic in 
our/my community.
Did we waste time and money spanning metros with IXs?