[142320] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cogent depeers ESnet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Cameron Byrne)
Tue Jun 21 21:22:25 2011
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:21:41 -0700
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Christopher Pilkington <cjp@0x1.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jun 20, 2011 9:47 AM, "Christopher Pilkington" <cjp@0x1.net> wrote:
>
> On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:53 AM, Jon Lewis <jlewis@lewis.org> wrote:
>
> > internet connectivity, and that much $ is at stake, you're stupid if you
don't have some redundancy. Nothing works all the time forever.
>
> I can't consider Cogent even a redundant link, since I need two other
> upstreams to reach the Internet redundantly.
>
This is the same case I face with level3 today. I have about 5 upstream
isp's and level3 is the only one that does not have a "full ipv6 table" and
therefore sites where level3 is one of the 2 upstreams are not redundant.
I have calls into my account team, the response they gave me was laughable.
.... something about how only 0.3% of the internet uses ipv6.
Escalating .... if you can, it might be an opportune time for other level3
customers consider an escalation.
Their lack of a full table contributes to the aaaa breakage / risk. This is
not acceptable. Buying from cogent is its own reward, level3 should not be a
service risk in itself.
Cb
> -cjp
>
