Peering problem with NSP

Dave Siegel dsiegel at
Tue Oct 31 22:00:23 UTC 1995

> Actually he reported that he did ask you for information and his take on
> the information was that it made no sense, hence he asked us...IMHO that's
> a reasonable thing to do.  To me it looks like your trying to spin the
> event now, this post has a quite different tone and information than the
> first you made here.  It makes it hard to take you seriously...but it 
> was hard to take the whole thing seriously from the first still
> makes no sense that you won't guarantee routing for him unless he makes
> you his primary provider.  It sounds like you're just trying to tie him
> up.

He did not deny routing, he denied the availability of providing full routes.
There's a difference.

If he's getting a connection from Sprintlink, he can only accept the routes
that he wants, and can then default through fONOROLA, and thereby load

I don't think that looks anything like denial of service.  It may not be
the preferred method, but it certainly doesn't make them unusable.


Dave Siegel			President, RTD Systems & Networking, Inc.
(520)623-9663			Systems Consultant -- Unix, LANs, WANs, Cisco
dsiegel at			User Tracking & Acctg -- "Written by an ISP,						for an ISP."

More information about the NANOG mailing list