That's an excellant point Andrew and a great example. It certainly makes the case for considering continuing the current model. Again, it comes down to evaluating costs. Jay's model seems to indicate that the non-recurring fees are the largest part of this model. It's also fair to assume this gear will be in service for more than one year. s *Shaun Carlson *Senior Network Engineer | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | contact: protocol.by/scarlson em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jul 23, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:
Obviously others here are members of more than just MICE, would some care to share the structure of other IX's? maybe that helps us guide our model?
So I might be in the minority here, but I don't see the need to charge recurring fees, especially with the level of community involvement/donations we have seen with MICE.
This model has worked just fine for SIX ( http://www.seattleix.net/intro.htm), and they are operating on a MUCH larger scale.
SFP = cost of GigE port SFP + $5k = cost of 10GigE port
And no shortage of contributors: http://www.seattleix.net/contrib.htm
-- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa@gmail.com
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1