nanog mailing list archives
Re: transit across the ixs
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 06:51:20 -0800 (PST)
cool beans. employment security for level-3s at the noc. makes it really fun to debug when packets come from places different where routes go. good job.Aw, come on Randy. It's not like it's rocket science.
no, but it is non-trivial added burden for the noc. we don't do that. does not scale.
The routes do go there, after all. A "show ip bgp w.x.y.z" on the TC router will show your router as the next hop.
i.e. our noc has to contact the third party noc. half the folk on mae-x seem not to even have nocs. does not scale.
How do you debug problems with a multihomed customer on the end of a serial link when you can't see their config?
they have a vested interest in debugging their problem and are going to be available when the problem site is in trouble because they are the site with the problem.
In another thought, what if the "offender" is not a transit customer, but the same provider.
that's why we listen to meds at exchanges.
Is this bad? You agreed to peer with them. Does your peering agreement restrict them to one router as the source?
yup. randy
Current thread:
- Re: transit across the ixs, (continued)
- Re: transit across the ixs bmanning (Feb 14)
- Re: transit across the ixs Randy Bush (Feb 14)
- Re: transit across the ixs bmanning (Feb 14)
- Re: transit across the ixs Randy Bush (Feb 14)
- Re: transit across the ixs bmanning (Feb 14)
- Message not available
- Re: transit across the ixs Jay R. Ashworth (Feb 15)
- Re: transit across the ixs Randy Bush (Feb 14)
- Re: transit across the ixs bmanning (Feb 14)
- Re: transit across the ixs Randy Bush (Feb 17)
- Re: transit across the ixs Leo Bicknell (Feb 17)
- Re: transit across the ixs Randy Bush (Feb 17)
- Re: transit across the ixs Jared Mauch (Feb 17)