Does Teleglobe implements QoS ?
Neil J. McRae
neil at domino.org
Tue Nov 30 08:26:42 UTC 1999
Teleglobe's service is a complete joke. I've bought speakers
from a man in a white van and got better service.
I've just opened a ticket recently regarding UUNET issues also.
For some reason Teleglobe was routeing one of our prefixes via
their UUNET interconnect at LA and the other via Seattle, The LA
route was really bad whilst the Seattle was bearable, I emailed
trouble at teleglobe.net it takes 2 hours for them to respond to only
THE FOLLOWING IS THE ANNOUNCEMENTS WE DO FOR BOTH YOUR NETWORKS IN NEW-YORK.
Do you notice something wrong with that picture? The actual information
that followed was a sh ip bgp of our routes on the access router that
we connect too. Useful? hoho not I think.
They then went on to blame UUNET. We re-routed the traffic via
one of our other transit providers and some miracle must have
happened on UUNET's network because the problem went away.
My view is that Teleglobe have severe congestion issues
with UUNET at the moment it seems to be a regular occurance with them.
Whats more annoying is that they never admit these problem unless
you make a huge noise about it, a regular occurance seems to be
report a fault and get a reponse that indicates that they already know
about the problem? IF SO WHY NOT TELL US?
> Macomnet (ISP, AS8470, Moscow, Russia) uses world connectivity via
> Teleglobe. We have a router, managed by us, in NY. The interface pointing
> to America uses Teleglobe's address and another one, pointing to Moscow
> - ours.
> Regullary I see a quite strange heavy delays on Teleglobe to
> Alternet interconnect point. I traced the route to several
> destinations with SRC addresses from Teleglobe's and Macomnet's IP blocks.
> The problem is that packets with SRC from Teleglobe address space passes
> through with lower delays than packets with Macomnet's SRC addresses.
Neil J. McRae - Alive and Kicking.
neil at DOMINO.ORG
More information about the NANOG