nanog mailing list archives
RE: C&W Peering
From: John Starta <john () starta org>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 16:18:48 -0700
See PSINet's network status page (http://www.psi.com/cgi-bin/netstatus.pl5) for a possible answer.
jas At 06:22 PM 6/4/01 -0400, Vivien M. wrote:
I suppose now PSI gets to learn the hard way what happens when they scared half their peers away (to be polite...), and now find that a bunch of the other half are now turning down their PSI peering links. (BTW, has it been established here whether PSI or CW is to blame for this?)
Current thread:
- Re: C&W Peering, (continued)
- Re: C&W Peering Travis Pugh (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Eric A. Hall (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Travis Pugh (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering David Schwartz (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering shane (Jun 05)
- Re: C&W Peering shane (Jun 05)
- Message not available
- Re: C&W Peering ken harris. (Jun 05)
- Re: C&W Peering Jared Mauch (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Mike Hughes (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering Vivien M. (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering John Starta (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Christopher A. Woodfield (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Jared Mauch (Jun 04)
- Message not available
- Re: C&W Peering Eric Gauthier (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering Vivien M. (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Leo Bicknell (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Richard Welty (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Vincent J. Bono (Jun 05)
- Re: C&W Peering Rafi Sadowsky (Jun 06)