On Jun 4, 2015, at 2:37 PM, David Farmer <farmer@UMN.EDU> wrote:
On 6/4/15 15:48 , Hannigan, Martin wrote:
On Jun 4, 2015, at 12:14 PM, Reid Fishler <rfishler@HE.NET> wrote:
Marty- As with SIX, the node operates as an extension. The core switch/switches will remain in Cologix.
Suboptimal, unfortunately.
Yes, this is not fully optimal yet, I want to see at least a second core site eventually. However, given;
1. This is our first announced remote site. 2. There are other remote sites in the pipeline, I believe. 3. Finally, none of the remote sites are even operational yet.
Therefore, I suggest we defer the issue of another core site until the remote site picture develops a little bit. At this point picking the correct facility for an additional core site is premature, we are more likely to pick wrong than right at this point.
I'm happy to consider the issue when there are operational remote sites with more than 2 or 3 participants each.
Sounds better. Remember, SIX isn’t captured by the colo, MICE is for all intents and purposes. A second core should be a priority and help provide competitive pressure to make that less of an issue and provide real benefits for the members. Thanks for the vision. Appreciated. Best, -M<