Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in general)
Baldur Norddahl
baldur.norddahl at gmail.com
Sat May 19 20:28:07 UTC 2018
What happened to do not trust anyone? Create your own resiliency by being
multihomed to as many transits you can afford.
You need the ability to shutdown a transit that is having trouble. It
happens to all of them.
Regards
Baldur
ons. 16. maj 2018 19.02 skrev David Hubbard <dhubbard at dino.hostasaurus.com>:
> I’m curious if anyone who’s used 3356 for transit has found shortcomings
> in how their peering and redundancy is configured, or what a normal
> expectation to have is. The Tampa Bay market has been completely down for
> 3356 IP services twice so far this year, each for what I’d consider an
> unacceptable period of time (many hours). I’m learning that the entire
> market is served by just two fiber routes, through cities hundreds of miles
> away in either direction. So, basically two fiber cuts, potentially 1000+
> miles apart, takes the entire region down. The most recent occurrence was
> a week or so ago when a Miami-area cut and an Orange, Texas cut (1287
> driving miles apart) took IP services down for hours. It did not take
> point to point circuits to out of market locations down, so that suggests
> they even have the ability to be more redundant and simply choose not to.
>
> I feel like it’s not unreasonable to expect more redundancy, or a much
> smaller attack surface given a disgruntled lineman who knows the routes
> could take an entire region down with a planned cut four states apart.
> Maybe other regions are better designed? Or are my expectations
> unreasonable? I carry three peers in that market, so it hasn’t been
> outage-causing, but I use 3356 in other markets too, and have plans for
> more, but it makes me wonder if I just haven't had the pleasure of similar
> outages elsewhere yet and I should factor that expectation into the
> design. It creates a problem for me in one location where I can only get
> them and Cogent, since Cogent can't be relied on for IPv6 service, which I
> need.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list