Level 3 issues

marco marco at zero11.com
Sun Dec 28 13:11:13 CST 2008


Blake Pfankuch wrote:
> Any word on the actual cause of the issue?
>
> From: Derek Bodner [mailto:subscribedlists at derekbodner.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 11:53 AM
> To: Blake Pfankuch
> Cc: Jon Wolberg; Jason Cheslock; nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Level 3 issues
>
> Looks like most providers here in the east coast are routing through level3 again, and I'm not seeing any packet loss or latency anymore.
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Blake Pfankuch <bpfankuch at cpgreeley.com<mailto:bpfankuch at cpgreeley.com>> wrote:
> Seems to be normalizing here in Colorado as well, however still having occasional packet loss to NY.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Wolberg [mailto:jon at defenderhosting.com<mailto:jon at defenderhosting.com>]
> Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 11:40 AM
> To: Jason Cheslock
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org<mailto:nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Level 3 issues
>
> Confirmed here as well.
>
>
> Jon
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Cheslock" <sangreviento at gmail.com<mailto:sangreviento at gmail.com>>
> To: "marco" <marco at zero11.com<mailto:marco at zero11.com>>
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org<mailto:nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 1:35:45 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: Level 3 issues
>
> According to L3, this issue should be fixed and we should start seeing
>
>   
>> the traffic normalizing.
>> Can anyone confirm?
>>     
>
> Here in Richmond Virginia, everything seems to be back to normal now.
>  Traffic coming from my Comcast connection can get through L3 now.
>
>
>  7 11 ms 13 ms 11 ms te-0-3-0-0-cr01.mclean.va.ibone.comcast.net<http://te-0-3-0-0-cr01.mclean.va.ibone.comcast.net> [68.
> 86.91.121]
>  8 10 ms 11 ms 12 ms xe-11-1-0.edge1.Washington1.Level3.net<http://xe-11-1-0.edge1.Washington1.Level3.net> [4.79.231
> .9]
>  9 12 ms 17 ms 18 ms vlan89.csw3.Washington1.Level3.net<http://vlan89.csw3.Washington1.Level3.net> [4.68.17.190]
>
>  10 12 ms 17 ms 17 ms ae-84-84.ebr4.Washington1.Level3.net<http://ae-84-84.ebr4.Washington1.Level3.net> [4.69.134.1
> 85]
>  11 16 ms 26 ms 16 ms ae-3-3.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net<http://ae-3-3.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net> [4.69.132.94]
>  12 32 ms 30 ms 17 ms ae-81-81.csw3.NewYork1.Level3.net<http://ae-81-81.csw3.NewYork1.Level3.net> [4.69.134.74]
>
>  13 15 ms 19 ms 16 ms ae-3-89.edge1.NewYork1.Level3.net<http://ae-3-89.edge1.NewYork1.Level3.net> [4.68.16.142]
>
>
>
> --
> Derek Bodner
> subscribedlists at derekbodner.com<mailto:subscribedlists at derekbodner.com>
>   
>From what I heard, it was some some malfunction with a router in
Washington D.C. which terminated a 100GB bundle from Paris. It was
carring about 50GB at the time of the failure.

Not sure why routes within the US would be effected.




More information about the NANOG mailing list