Level 3's side of the story
Richard A Steenbergen
ras at e-gerbil.net
Sat Oct 8 05:24:40 UTC 2005
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 12:45:32AM -0400, Jon Lewis wrote:
>
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, David Hubbard wrote:
>
> >>I don't remember seeing this public notice from Level(3) posted....
> >>Wouldn't that be "without notice from Level(3)"?
> >
> >They notified Cogent, not the public. Cogent chose to
>
> I think it's also interesting, that AFAIK, Level3 didn't give their own
> customers any advance notice. We're a customer. I saw nothing about this
> until it hit nanog. We're multi homed, so the impact on us was unnoticed.
I don't know how you missed it, but as far as I can tell every sales rep
(3) has was mobilized to call every customer or potential customer they
have ever spoken to during the month of Augusst, informing them about the
receipt of a depeering notice from Level 3 and offering affected customers
zero-commit Cogent ports.
Among the people I know who took that offer, Cogent actually worked
quickly (quicker than normal I would say) to get service up before the
event. There was also a post to NANOG about the depeering in early
September. While Cogent may not have taken out a full page ad in the New
York Times for it, they certainly made every effort to inform those who
needed to know, and they were never ambiguous about the fact that they
were fully expecting to be segmented from (3).
--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
More information about the NANOG
mailing list