[150915] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: did AS174 and AS4134 de-peer?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Greg Chalmers)
Wed Mar 7 17:56:20 2012
In-Reply-To: <CAPKtXOz1CgNjP=24pZQUoaEz1yUD9+nKMS7kfFnfLujzJspSDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:55:29 +1100
From: Greg Chalmers <gchalmers@gmail.com>
To: Jim Cowie <cowie@renesys.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Jim Cowie <cowie@renesys.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:23 AM, John van Oppen <jvanoppen@spectrumnet.us
> >wrote:
>
> > All -
> >
> > I was noticing that it appears from our Seattle-based full route feed
> from
> > cogent that they may have de-peered AS4134 (or vise-versa)... anyone
> know
> > anything about this? We noticed this recently in a shift of traffic
> away
> > from cogent for traffic to and from china telecom... Now cogent's path
> is
> > _174_1239_4134_.
> >
> >
> Indeed:
> http://www.renesys.com/blog/2012/03/cogent-depeers-china-telecom.shtml
>
> cheers, --jim
>
Isn't this journalism a bit yellow? No facts / based on speculation..
- Greg
