nanog mailing list archives
Re: Akamai wierdness
From: Charles Wyble <charles () thewybles com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:35:53 -0700
I usually just call their toll free support number when their are occasional issues. This is from a content provider perspective (using Akamai as a CDN for the sites I support). Never had an issue getting a hold of anyone and getting the issue resolved (two times I have called them, it was issues on our side anyway).
Paul Stewart wrote:
Not to add to a potential "peeing" contest here.... but we have Akamai equipment in our network - it's a very important component to our service delivery. If/when there is ever a problem (quite rare in our experience other than the odd hardware failure that has no impact anyways due to the cluster configuration) we send an email to noc () akamai com. Typical response times on a 24X7 basis never normally exceed 20 minutes at most. I can remember one time where it might have been an hour.That's a long ways from "blackhole" based on our experience...Paul Stewart -----Original Message-----From: JC Dill [mailto:jcdill.lists () gmail com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 5:03 PMCc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall wrote:Patrick Gilmore wrote [context inserted]:Perhaps using the RFC required address [noc@akamai] would be moreproductive than e-mailing 10k strangers? Normally I see emails like this and, if it's Not In My Back Yard, andtheInternet is not going nutz, the delete key explains how worried i am. Back to your email:using the RFC required addressThe correct catty response to the Akamai question is :ccare () akamai com.That's C as in "Customer", Care as in "they actually care". I would end the email there, but it really gets me how someone that is in-house doesn't realize that noc@akamai is a black hole.Paul, you might want to test a theory of this nature before you post about it to more than a thousand of your colleagues. This morning I sent email to noc () akamai com and received a personalized (non-autoresponder) reply 17 minutes later.jc---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and contains confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender immediately and then destroy this transmission, including all attachments, without copying, distributing or disclosing same. Thank you."
Current thread:
- Akamai wierdness John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Mar 22)
- RE: Akamai wierdness Paul Stewart (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 23)
- RE: Akamai wierdness Paul Stewart (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Charles Wyble (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness John Palmer (NANOG Acct) (Mar 22)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall (Mar 23)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 24)
- Re: Akamai wierdness Paul Wall (Mar 24)
- Re: Akamai wierdness jamie rishaw (Mar 24)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 24)
- RE: Akamai wierdness Paul Stewart (Mar 22)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Akamai wierdness Jeffrey Cohen (Mar 25)
- Re: Akamai wierdness JC Dill (Mar 25)