[95394] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Fri Mar 16 20:01:34 2007
From: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>
To: "'NANOG'" <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:59:02 -0500
In-Reply-To: <3F8DBC2D-1390-4A5C-99EC-DD6CBD38B545@bsdboy.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Some locations are just too cost prohibitive to multihome, but that really
is a select few. Few places are out of the reach of a couple wireless hops
back to civilization.
--Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Wil
Schultz
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:56 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
Almost ALL?
Any company, or any person for that matter, that relies on their
Internet connectivity for their lively hood should be multihomed.
-wil
On Mar 16, 2007, at 4:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Almost ALL providers should be multihomed.
>
> --Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On
> Behalf Of
> virendra rode //
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:26 AM
> To: NANOG
> Subject: Re: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Frank Bulk wrote:
>> http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/articlePrint.cfm?id=1310151
>>
>> Is this a normal thing for Level 3 to do, cut off small, responsive
>> providers?
>>
>> Frank
> - ------------------------
> Just curious, should "small responsive providers" should be multi-
> homed?
>
>
>
> regards,
> /virendra
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFF+XOApbZvCIJx1bcRAtkwAJ9vNak3F8FlCf9VDycf6IlAr445nACg59kB
> w2OWAGdchd2XQyxxgZWQaug=
> =Yb1+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
