Re: [cobalt-users] How many can I host on a T1 Line (Cobalt 4)

[Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Brent Sims wrote:

> I did not invent it. I did, however dowload it at the
> below listed URL and so can you. While you can shoot at me me for
> neglecting to mention that it currently can only sniff SSH1, I
> suspect there are a whole lot of people on this list using SSH1, and
> "sniff SSH" ettercap most certainly can do:
> 
>         http://ettercap.sourceforge.net/

I'm shocked, I had no idea <frown>.  I'm running ssh2 myself, but I'll
be in touch with my clients today to make sure they're all doing the
same.

> } Brent, if you know of any providers offering sub $500 T-1, which is what
> } it sounds like you're saying, please direct me to URLs of companies
> } offering same; I've not seen one yet that's not fraught with fine-print
> } that makes it much more expensive in the long run.  I've been trying to
> } find such a connect (anywhere) for some time.
> 
>         I did not buy one as we decided to focus on name recognition
> when buying connectivity.

What I noticed was T-1s with either managed bandwidth or managed data
transit, extra costs for local loops, etc., etc.

I found the lowest cost T-1s to the Internet throughout Southern
California at Pajo (www.pajo.net).  They include the router and the
local loop at one combined price.

Other companies advertised less but there were lots of extras, most
didn't include the local loop, etc.

> However while shopping for the most bang
> for our bucks, I inadvertently stumbled upon a sales channel which
> was discussed on the ISP Bandwidth list about last November or so.
> You might want to search the archives. What started the discussion
> was an offer I received for a Qwest circuit by a authorized Qwest
> reseller for a third of what Qwest would sell me the very same
> circuit for.

Now that's interesting.  However I've got two "issues" <wry grin>...

I'm not in Qwest local territory; I presume I'd have to pay for the
local loop.

And...

I've heard an awful lot of bad stuff about Qwest connectivity.

> Most interesting, at least to me, was that the contract
> was with Qwest, the SLA was too, and the invoices came from Qwest
> too. The price, however, was only available from the reseller - so
> were some of the offers.

That's one of the things Qwest does... they get their reps fighting each
other.  I suppose it must work for them or they wouldn't do it, but it
sure makes for confusion in the market place, and it doesn't do much for
reseller loyalty.

> I don't like posting prices that I can't
> substantiate on a public forum but, as I recall, a 128kbps
> point-to-point was the low end offer and it was just about $340.00
> per month on a one year contract - $200.00 for the loop and ports
> from 128kbps and up were offered at substantially less than what I
> knew to be market rate.

Pajo's current price is $499/month, $500 install, incuding managed Cisco
Router, on a one-year contract, for 512k.

> One of our hosting clients, who works for
> SGI there in silicon valley, first offered us the deal. I've since
> been contacted by many others who offered the very same deal since
> but I didn't save their contact information.

Pajo is second-tier service provider.  I know many people prefer
first-tier providers, because they own their own fiber and cable.  I
prefer second tier providers like Pajo, who aggregate at their own
location, and who then use BGP to manage connections with several
first-tier providers.

I understand all the arguments pro and con, but three years' experience
with Pajo, starting with a full T-1 and moving up to 4.62 megabites per
second (three aggregated T-1s), shows me they work very well <smile>. 
They've never had unscheduled downtime, and scheduled downtime has been
extremely minimal.

I don't even know why I'm writing all this; I have no connection with
them; I don't resell them, and I don't make money off of them <smile>. 
Only that we bought a T-1 from them when I was part owner of another
hosting company, and that he's quite happy with them three years later.

> While I do indeed have
> contact information for the client mentioned above and could
> therefor save you some time, you are a competitor and, well, you
> just loudly called me a liar in a public and archived forum...

I certainly didn't mean to.  I was being juvenile, I suppose... I was
saying something like "put up or shut up" or "put your money where your
mouth is", I suppose <frown>.

I've noticed I've been quite testy lately.  Okay, my belated new years
resolution is to get lest testy and more cooperative.

Now if I can only keep it <wry grin>.

I do apologize, though.

> I'm in a good mood though. If you can find the discussion
> I started regarding my experience on the ISP-Bandwidth list you'll
> probably find all you need to know to find yourself a similar offer.

Thanks.  I think we will stick with recommending Pajo, though as opposed
to Qwest.  I've decided I like letting other people manage my bandwidth
for me <smile>.  For example, our colocation is with Inflow in San
Diego.  They're what some people would call carrier-neutral, but they've
got a managed service that includes good connectivity through several
connections and good BGP people to manage it.

Jeff
-- 
Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Linux and Cobalt/Sun/RaQ Consulting
nobaloney.net
P. O. Box 52672, Riverside, CA  92517
voice: (909) 778-9980  *  fax: (702) 548-9484