Oh, I thought I had replied to this.
I'm also looking for a home for one HP DL380.

I'd be in for 2Us

Regards,
Alex Kink

On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Bruce N <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> All right, we got five people now. Wondering if we can cross post this to
> user list too for more exposure? This is a group thing, shouldn't be any
> problem. Right Dave?
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]
>
>
> Anyone else looking for co-location, shared, dedicated hosting?
> -Bruce________________________________
> > From: [email protected]
> > Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 22:18:14 -0400
> > Subject: Re: [biz] Idea about Shared Co-Location
> > To: [email protected]
> > CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> >
> > I would like to toss my hat in as well.
> >
> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Bruce N> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Going through the posts I can see the following people interested:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [email protected]
> >
> > [email protected]
> >
> > [email protected]
> >
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please add your e-mail address to the list and then we can agree on terms
> or choices. Like to see this happening really quick. I think you should add
> your name even if you are looking for Dedicated hosting rather than
> co-location because we can even get aggregated co-lo + dedicated servers
> even if required.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >> Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 16:26:21 -0400
> >
> >> From: [email protected]
> >
> >> To: [email protected]
> >
> >> CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> >
> >> Subject: Re: [biz] Idea about Shared Co-Location
> >
> >>
> >
> >> So is this a go or no go? I'd be interested in placing a box or two out
> >
> >> there if we can make something work.
> >
> >>
> >
> >> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Bruce N> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Thanks for the clarification Erik.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Hello Paul,
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> You may not get the best "shared" deal out there but it's much less
> >
> >>> headache than with a true co-op system anyways. Would you actually go
> out
> >
> >>> and sue the guy with only 1U server just because he bailed out? I guess
> you
> >
> >>> never filed in courts to know what the costs are to sue people for
> every
> >
> >>> single little thing out there. A co-op system like this would never
> have the
> >
> >>> money to come up with the paralegal fees even. So, you are not much
> more
> >
> >>> secured anyways with such a system; anyhow, by picking one person I
> meant
> >
> >>> just a rep to grab good prices like Erik said. For a co-op system once
> you
> >
> >>> calculate the administration cost, insurance cost for bail outs,
> etc...you
> >
> >>> are already loosing whatever you thought you might have saved in the
> first
> >
> >>> place. What I purposed was a separate contract btw the individual and
> co-lo
> >
> >>> provider for every single member so issues like what you mentioned
> never
> >
> >>> happen and still you get a better rate than going in individually.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Again, just a thought.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> -Bruce
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>> Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 22:34:23 -0400
> >
> >>>> From: [email protected]
> >
> >>>> To: [email protected]
> >
> >>>> CC: [email protected]; [email protected]
> >
> >>>> Subject: Re: [biz] Idea about Shared Co-Location
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>> On Wed, 6 May 2009, Erik Turk wrote:
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>>> I think the co-op is one method of providing the desired service.
> >
> >>> Another way is for us to
> >
> >>>>> say to existing providers - hey, we have 40 people who want this type
> >
> >>> of service - what
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>> Then you are just 40 individuals. With your own bandwidth constrains,
> >
> >>> without being
> >
> >>>> able to combine the traffic into a good deal with 95 percentile. If
> that
> >
> >>> was a good
> >
> >>>> option, we'd all already be hosting our 1U server.
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>>> can you do for us, and then each of us makes an individual decision
> >
> >>> whether or not to
> >
> >>>>> enter a business relationship with that provider. My understanding is
> >
> >>> that Bruce was
> >
> >>>>> mentioning the latter as an option.
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>> Neither of the 40 people would likely be able to get 24/7 access,
> since
> >
> >>> you're only a 1U
> >
> >>>> customer. No aggregate bandwidth to allow us to peak etc. etc.
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>> Paul
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >>>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> _________________________________________________________________
> >
> >>> Find info faster and easier with Internet Explorer 8.
> >
> >>> http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9655583
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> >
> > Find info faster and easier with Internet Explorer 8.
> >
> > http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9655583
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Anthony Boyington
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Find info faster and easier with Internet Explorer 8.
> http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9655583
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to