Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Amy J who wrote (89810)	10/11/1999 7:44:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Amy - re: Excerpts from the Barrons Exodus Article: From the article: "This vulnerability has recently become all too clear. "Ebay goes down every few weeks, and Exodus is their hoster," says Schaaf. "Exodus has experienced several outages." Indeed, on Friday, eBay announced that it was moving part of its Web hosting business to Exodus rival AboveNet Communications." Wow. If Intel does this thing, they had better be GOOD! That's all Intel needs is an "ebay outage", high profile failure event, or heaven forbid, a series of them. With Intel's high public profile... Another recent cost-saving measure: Instead of having many employees working in every data center, Exodus consolidated its response team, manned by 70 people in Santa Clara. "Now if it's 2 a.m. and a center needs a security expert, there is someone in California," says Hancock. Hence Exodus can build more and larger centers without adding personnel. But security experts like Ulsch say centers should be heavily manned. He says they're sacrificing security for growth. Hancock responds that Exodus scores high marks in security, adding that there is a guard at each center. If data center access is requested, the customer's name and company must be on that center's list. So, too, centers have video cameras and customers may request even more security, like a vault around their server, among other measures. But a Barron's staffer who recently visited an Exodus warehouse in New Jersey not only found a large sign advertising Exodus on its door, but also used a door directly into the warehouse that was gaping wide open. Further, there was no guard or any other surveillance there. Schaaf has a similarly alarming story. On a visit to an Exodus site in Waltham, Massachusetts, she asked her guides about data-center protections against terrorism. "They looked at us like we were Martians. One blurted out, 'Nobody knows what we do here.' " Schaaf rolls her eyes. "Come on, guys," she says. "These centers are the lifeblood of a networked economy. Get real." Security is one facet that I would not expect Intel to skimp on, based on my historical observations. Intel IMO inherently pays lot of attention to security issues, you know, paranoid, and all that. When spikes occur, competitors like Qwest and AT&T have the ability to reroute traffic across their networks if necessary to ensure that data arrive without any glitches. For example, if the lines are busy between New York and Chicago, a company with a network can instantly reroute that traffic through Atlanta. Bottom line: "If you don't own a network you cannot guarantee the connection," says William Klein, a data communications analyst at Wasserstein Perella. This seems, in my very unwashed opinion, like a valid concern to me Amy. What are your thoughts on this issue? Are there any possible avenues for operations such as Intel's or Exodus' to form partnerships with companies that own network infrastructure? Or are all of these companies competitors? PB