Internet Backbone Index

Wed Jul 9 14:32:51 UTC 1997

Sean did not know that Peering is what makes you a National Backbone
Provider.  It may make you what has been coined as a tier 1 provider, but I
do not see that this can scale as more companies access the net. If you
remember at the Nanog meeting, Randy address this model of 2 to 5
peers/transits if I remember the discuss and that is what we are doing at
SAVVIS.  Fortunately Our target markets are not just libraries and other
information providers, it's EVERYONE that needs a T1 and above connection
to the Internet.  How many cities are you in Sean, where are DRA's POPs for
customers to access?  How much bandwidth does DRA have to get these
customer to other network?  Let's compare bandwidth shall we.

When 80 to 90 percent of the Internet traffic is to MCI, SPRINT and UUNET
then our model is the right way to build this, not to try and see how many
peering agreements one can get.  

You are right about our model,  IT WORKS.

Gary Zimmerman
V.P. of Network Engineering
Savvis Communications Corp.
email: garyz at savvis.com
http://www.savvis.com
Office: 314.719.2423
Address: 7777 Bonhomme Suite 1000
               St. Louis, MO 63105

----------
> From: Sean Donelan <SEAN at SDG.DRA.COM>
> To: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: Re: Internet Backbone Index
> Date: Tuesday, July 08, 1997 3:55 PM
> 
> >I would really like to know how Boardwatch can continually say Savvis is
a
> >national backbone provider when they peer with nobody, and that is part
of
> >their business plan, and only buy transit from the big 5.  Then they
> >neglect to list DRA as a backbone provider, when DRA appears at many
major
> >exchanges and peers with damn near everyone under the sun from what I
can
> 
> Publisher's perogative.
> 
> I'm always amused when the latest edition of the Boardwatch ISP directory
> comes out.  Fortunately, DRA's target markets are libraries and other
> information providers, not ISPs, although we have a few ISPs as
customers.
> Even though DRA tried to provide accurate information to Boardwatch, it
> always seems to get mangled in the Boardwatch editorial process.  For
> example, in the latest issue DRA's listing says we have a 0.099 Mbps
> connection with Sprint.  I don't know how to even order a 0.099 Mbps
> connection.  In a previous issue Boardwatch said DRA sold dialup
connections
> for $19.95/month, even though we had told Boardwatch DRA didn't offer
> any dialup services.  At least Boardwatch no longer lists Sean Doran as
> the chief engineer for InternetMCI.
> 
> After awhile one gets tired of trying to correct other people's mistakes
> over and over again.  Maybe I should start following the InternetMCI
model,
> and claim everything is a big secret.
> -- 
> Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
>   Affiliation given for identification not representation