nanog mailing list archives
RE: Sprint / C&W peering issues?
From: Jeff Loughridge <jeffl () sprint net>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:16:27 -0500 (EST)
We have applied a temporary fix to relieve congestion with C&W in Atlanta. Additional bandwidth is pending. Just to clarify, the Sprintlink backbone is not experiencing capacity issues nor are we dissatisfied with the performance across our private peering connections as a whole. In the majority of cases, our proactive monitoring and traffic graphing tools allow us to correct potential problems before they become apparent to Sprint customers and others. Please contact our noc via phone or e-mail when you have concerns about our network. I am confident of their ability to address problems and escalate if necessary. Jeff Loughridge Operations Engineering Backbone Operations On Fri, 19 Jan 2001, Matt Levine wrote:
Sprint seems to be having capacity issues, I've noticed L3/Sprint SanJose goes thru some serious degradation during most of the day.. Supposedly the issue has been open in both NOC's for 2-3 months...they're "working on it".. Have you tried contacting C&W about it? Sprint wasn't incredibly helpful, but L3 provided some information for us.. Regards, Matt -- Matt Levine, CTO <mlevine () efront com> eFront Media, Inc. - http://www.efront.com Phone: +1 714 428 8500 ext. 504 Fax : +1 949 203 2156 ICQ : 17080004 -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of jlewis () lewis org Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 4:04 PM To: nanog () merit edu Subject: Sprint / C&W peering issues? The past few days, I've been noticing packet loss, apparently at the points where Sprint and C&W exchange traffic. Today, I emailed a note about this including the output from a few mtr's in each direction to noc () sprint net, and though I got no reply, an hour or so later, I noticed packets were taking a slightly different route (apparently going through a different peering connection in a different city if you believe the hostnames) and the packet loss was gone and round trip times much better. I left the office for a bit, and now that I'm back, I see the packets are back to using the old peering connection that I can only assume must be overloaded. Anyone know what the deal is? Matt's traceroute [v0.42] orldfl-ns-1.atlantic.net Fri Jan 19 18:58:51 2001 Keys: D - Display mode R - Restart statistics Q - Quit Packets Pings Hostname %Loss Rcv Snt Last Best Avg Worst 1. orldflwcom-br-1-fe0-0.atlantic.net 0% 30 30 0 0 0 1 2. sl-gw8-orl-3-0-TS11.sprintlink.net 0% 30 30 1 0 1 1 3. sl-bb11-orl-5-2.sprintlink.net 0% 30 30 1 1 1 2 4. sl-bb21-atl-9-1.sprintlink.net 0% 30 30 11 11 11 12 5. sl-bb2-atl-0-0-0.sprintlink.net 0% 30 30 12 11 30 190 6. core3-serial2-0-0.Atlanta.cw.net 20% 24 30 37 33 37 41 7. corerouter1.Atlanta.cw.net 27% 22 30 34 33 36 50 8. acr1-loopback.Atlantaald.cw.net 20% 24 30 36 32 37 39 9. bar7-loopback.Atlantaald.cw.net 27% 22 30 48 33 37 48 10. ??? Hop 10 is a router with some packet filtering...no response is expected there. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis () lewis org*| I route System Administrator | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
Current thread:
- Sprint / C&W peering issues? jlewis (Feb 24)
- RE: Sprint / C&W peering issues? Matt Levine (Feb 24)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Sprint / C&W peering issues? Jeff Loughridge (Feb 24)
- RE: Sprint / C&W peering issues? jlewis (Feb 24)