[98446] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Problems with either Cisco.com or AT&T?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Schliesser, Benson)
Wed Aug 8 17:29:25 2007
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 15:29:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20070808150356.03070a88@cisco.com>
From: "Schliesser, Benson" <Benson.Schliesser@savvis.net>
To: "Michael Airhart" <mairhart@cisco.com>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Yep; when I sent my previous note, AS109 was still originating routes.
But packets seemed to die at the border router. Now I'm also seeing
routes via AS701 (UU/Verizon Biz) and AS1239 (Sprint) as well as AT&T,
but still no connectivity.
A few moments ago I was getting a response from the www.cisco.com
website, but it was a 403 Forbidden response. Thus I suspect that it's
not even a network problem so much as a website (LB, server, etc) issue,
or a DDoS attack, etc.
(Perhaps operators are changing route policy, trying to "fix" the wrong
issue?)
-Benson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Airhart [mailto:mairhart@cisco.com]=20
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 3:06 PM
> To: Schliesser, Benson
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Problems with either Cisco.com or AT&T?
>=20
> I can't speak for Cisco or Cisco IT, but as evidenced by this email,=20
> at least part of our connectivity is up.
>=20
> No doubt someone official is looking at it as we speak. (I'll just=20
> lurk Nanog to get the skinny)..
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >A brief look at routeviews shows www.cisco.com (198.133.219.25)
> >originating from AS109 (Cisco) and transiting via AS7132=20
> (AT&T/SBC) and
> >AS7018 (AT&T). Thus I suspect this is an issue with AS109 (Cisco) and
> >not with their providers. Though, I do feel wrong using the plural
> >"providers" in this case...
> >
> >-Benson
> > >
>=20
