[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
XO feedback
- Subject: XO feedback
- From: asr+nanog at latency.net (Adam Rothschild)
- Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 19:04:42 -0400
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <BB358AFB92EC7746BE361B835EB1746C01EFF8C6@SL6EXCHBE3.savvis.ad.savvis.net> <[email protected]>
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
- Follow-Ups:
- XO feedback
- From: compuwizz at gmail.com (Jared Geiger)