Cleveland/Cincinnati Co-location

Sun Jan 6 22:51:00 UTC 2019

>
> I’m not sure if you have to be in Cleveland or Cincinnati, but Cyxtera has
> an AMAZING data center in Columbus. (The DC can withstand winds up 140 MPH,
> is on the Century Link backbone, and has a solid rubber roof with no holes
> or cooling systems on the roof.)

Being on the CenturyLink backbone doesn't sound like a selling point to
me...

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 8:46 PM David Kehoe <dkehoe at pdmi.com> wrote:

> Former employer was in Expedient’s DC. You can honestly do better than
> Expedient. Look into the Power Redundancy, Cooling Efficiency of the
> building, if the site is a purpose built DC (Expedient in Cleveland is
> not). Is Cloud Connect for backups important? Have you identified your
> requirements? If you need a starting point look at the following: Data
> Center Certification (from the Uptime Institute), Distance, Compliance (if
> needed), Level of Controlled Access, Power SLA, N+1 Cooling, Multi-Homed
> ISPs, Uptime %, Monitoring, NOC, Purpose Built DC.
>
>
>
> Involta has a really good data center in Independence, Akron, and a very
> impressive site near Pittsburgh. They would give you the option of having
> Hot/Hot datacenters with their connectivity. I’m not sure if you have to be
> in Cleveland or Cincinnati, but Cyxtera has an AMAZING data center in
> Columbus. (The DC can withstand winds up 140 MPH, is on the Century Link
> backbone, and has a solid rubber roof with no holes or cooling systems on
> the roof.)
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> *David Kehoe*
>
>
>
> *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces at nanog.org> *On Behalf Of *
> nanog-request at nanog.org
> *Sent:* Friday, January 4, 2019 7:00 AM
> *To:* nanog at nanog.org
> *Subject:* NANOG Digest, Vol 132, Issue 4
>
>
>
> Send NANOG mailing list submissions to
> nanog at nanog.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> nanog-request at nanog.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> nanog-owner at nanog.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Cleveland/Cincinnati Co-location
> (Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail))
> 2. Re: Service Provider NetFlow Collectors (Aaron)
> 3. Re: Cleveland/Cincinnati Co-location (Shawn Ritchie)
> 4. Re: Announcing Peering-LAN prefixes to customers (Andy Davidson)
> 5. Report on Legal Barriers to RPKI Adoption (Christopher S. Yoo)
> 6. 192.208.19.0/24 hijack transiting 209, 286, 3320, 5511, 6461,
> 6762, 6830, 8220, 9002, 12956 (Dominik Bay)
> 7. Re: 192.208.19.0/24 hijack transiting 209, 286, 3320, 5511,
> 6461, 6762, 6830, 8220, 9002, 12956 (Jeff Shultz)
> 8. Astronaut accidently calls 911 from space (Sean Donelan)
> 9. Re: Cellular backup connections (Dovid Bender)
> 10. Re: 192.208.19.0/24 hijack transiting 209, 286, 3320, 5511,
> 6461, 6762, 6830, 8220, 9002, 12956 (Job Snijders)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:50:45 -0500
> From: "Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail)"
> <allenmckinleykitchen at gmail.com>
> To: "Justin M. Streiner" <streinerj at gmail.com>
> Cc: NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Cleveland/Cincinnati Co-location
> Message-ID: <91679AF9-E310-463C-B427-630F69C02222 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> +1 for Expedient. Not a current customer but a VERY satisfied former
> customer. (Decision to leave them was a foul case of penny-pincher
> mismanagement, above my pay grade and over my objections.)
>
> ..Allen
>
> > On Jan 3, 2019, at 01:00, Justin M. Streiner <streinerj at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2019, Mitchell Lewis wrote:
> >>
> >> I am working on project that may involve building points of presence in
> Cleveland & Cincinnati. Any suggestions as to which colocation facility in
> each city to build in? The prime factor of consideration for this project
> is access to waves to places like Chicago, New York & Ashburn. It would be
> nice to have multiple wave provider options to choose from.
> >>
> >> I have been looking at Cyrus One-7thStreet in Cincinnati & Databank in
> Cleveland.
> >
> > Expedient has two facilities in Cleveland that might be worth looking at.
> >
> > Thank you
> > jms
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 11:21:32 -0600
> From: Shawn Ritchie <me at shawnritchie.com>
> To: "Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail)" <allenmckinleykitchen at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Justin M. Streiner" <streinerj at gmail.com>, NANOG
> <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Cleveland/Cincinnati Co-location
> Message-ID: <19433FF4-0E0C-4D7A-9CF2-CF385AE0AAB1 at fastmail.fm>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> On Jan 3, 2019, at 9:50 AM, Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail) <
> allenmckinleykitchen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for Expedient. Not a current customer but a VERY satisfied former
> customer. (Decision to leave them was a foul case of penny-pincher
> mismanagement, above my pay grade and over my objections.)
> >
> > ..Allen
> >
> >> On Jan 3, 2019, at 01:00, Justin M. Streiner <streinerj at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2019, Mitchell Lewis wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I am working on project that may involve building points of presence
> in Cleveland & Cincinnati. Any suggestions as to which colocation facility
> in each city to build in? The prime factor of consideration for this
> project is access to waves to places like Chicago, New York & Ashburn. It
> would be nice to have multiple wave provider options to choose from.
> >>>
> >>> I have been looking at Cyrus One-7thStreet in Cincinnati & Databank in
> Cleveland.
> >>
> >> Expedient has two facilities in Cleveland that might be worth looking
> at.
> >>
> >> Thank you
> >> jms
>
> I’m in Expedient’s Cleveland DC and will second that they’re decent.
>
> —
> Shawn
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 132, Issue 4
> *************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190106/5ffd5c1c/attachment.html>