XO feedback

Sat Jul 3 05:47:19 UTC 2010

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Adam Rothschild
<asr+nanog at latency.net<asr%2Bnanog at latency.net>
> wrote:

> Here in the New York Metro, XO's collocation offering is pretty solid.
> No frills, but competently managed, and offered under a reasonable
> pricing model for retail collocation.
>
> I've had similarly positive experiences with their transport side of
> the house.  I've not looked at the IP product...
>
> I certainly belive the negative XO feedback shared; having heard
> similar, it would seem there's definite potential to be treated as
> merely a number.  At the same time, our experience has been great, and
> I'd happily recommend them.  I think the quality of your XO customer
> experience is directly proportional to the caliber of your account
> team, along with your ability to vendor-manage and assemble a suitable
> escalation matrix.
>
> As for the Savvis suggestion, I'm not sure I'd agree.  We're in 2010,
> yet they continue to maintain a fair number of gigabit-sized peering
> interfaces, seemingly operating at or close to capacity.
>
> HTH,
> -a
>
>

In the DC Market I can provide this input:

Voice PRIs - Apparently they don't realize they can provide CNAM service and
will argue that CallerID Name is not available from XO at all.

Voice SIP - They had a major DID outage this year for 8 to 12 hours that was
nationwide.

Point to Point DS3 - 3 or 4 complete failures in the past year. They then
failed to work with the local ILEC to arrange a time to meet and test
equipment. If I buy a circuit from XO, I don't expect to have to call Qwest
and Verizon to organize engineers. I'm paying XO to do that for me. Each
outage was on average 3 days long.

In the Las Vegas Market:

Flex T1 - Internet latency was extremely high. However they did install the
circuit in 2 weeks.

Usually the pricing is very good and this makes it hard to weigh all the
cons.

~Jared