[160950] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: TelePacific a good choice?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Geiger)
Wed Feb 20 13:17:03 2013
In-Reply-To: <CAN3um4whJrouyF2Q-mp+0JLDz9y0z2259vUQVM+iXtVKffJsAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:16:26 -0500
From: Jared Geiger <jared@compuwizz.net>
To: "NANOG Operators' Group" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
We have a customer who used them for IP transit at an office in San
Francisco. They seemed to have issues with International peering. Traffic
to Asia / Australia seemed to be bottlenecked. This was a year ago and the
bottleneck was between TelePacific and Global Crossing at the time.
The customer has moved to another provider and no longer has issues.
~Jared
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Mike Hale <eyeronic.design@gmail.com>wrote:
> I've used them at a previous employer, mainly for PRI termination but
> also for some transit and colo services.
>
> They were decent. Didn't have any major complaints.
>
> If IPv6 is important for you...per what Paul said, they probably
> wouldn't be your best choice. If IPv6 doesn't matter to you, they're
> good enough.
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Paul WALL <pauldotwall@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The lack of IPv6 implementation:
> >
> > http://bgp.he.net/AS14265#_asinfo
> >
> > should be the only feedback you need.
> >
> > On 2/19/13, Jeff Harper <jharper@well.com> wrote:
> >> Hiya,
> >>
> >> We're looking at TelePacific as a possible solution for some of our
> transit
> >> needs. If you have an honest experience with them, positive or
> negative,
> >> I'd like to hear from you.
> >>
> >> Simply email me off line with your experiences, thanks!
> >>
> >> Jeff Harper, CCIE (W) | www.well.com
> >> ip access-list extended jeff
> >> permit tcp any any eq intelligence
> >> deny tcp any any eq stupid-people
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
>
>
