|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
In-Reply-To: <20051007165627.GF10031@dal.net> Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net> From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 13:47:11 -0400 To: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu On Oct 7, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Charles Gucker wrote: > Simply put, yes. Longer answer, Level(3) would have to "kiss > and make up" with Cogent before the sessions would be coordinated to > be turned up. There would certainly have to be a renewed level of > communication between these two networks to come up with this result. I seriously doubt L3 would have to do anything but revert to the last known good configuration. If Cogent has done anything to those BGP configurations, they're not only being silly, but they are being disingenuous, since they said they left the configs in place. Of course, that only gets the bits flowing, it doesn't solve the underlying issue. -- TTFN, patrick
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |