Funny, I was just at your IPv6 sight this morning while researching multihoming scenarios. "That name sounds familiar....."
-Hammer- "I was a normal American nerd." -Jack Herer On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Hammer <bhmc...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree. But swapping providers is not the default answer in some > environments. I work in an enterprise with multiple GE circuits from > multiple providers to the Internet. The lead time on calling up a different > carrier and saying "I need a gigabit connection to the Internet" would > probably be 90-120 days. And then you get to go thru the > contracts/negotiations and MSAs. You don't just flip. In smaller operations > I understand. But I was simply saying that it's not always that easy. If I > went to my boss and said one of our carriers sucks and we should dump them > he would just laugh and throw me out. > > 1. What are the SLAs with the carrier in question? Do you have them clearly > defined? Are they out of SLA? If so, what compensation is entitled based on > violation of said SLA? > > 2. What trending are you doing to document the failures in SLA of the > carrier in question? Do we have a documented pattern of poor performence by > using that trending? > > 3. What are our contractual or legal options based on items 1 and 2? > > 4. Don't forget about the Layer8 (political) factor. If your telco manager > is buddies with the carrier then you have to double your documentation > against them. Some companies spend tens of millions a month on circuits. You > better be ready to justify yourself. > > > -Hammer- > > "I was a normal American nerd." > -Jack Herer > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > >> Assuming that he has provider independent space (why run full BGP feeds if >> you >> are not multihomed?), then, actually it's about on par and less disruptive >> in >> general. Add new provider, wait a day or two, then disconnect old >> provider. >> >> If he's using provider assigned space, then, the big hurdle is switching >> to provider >> independent (requires a renumber), but, that's a good idea for a variety >> of reasons. >> >> I would hardly call the type and frequency of outages described a "whim" >> when >> using that as a reason to change providers. Sounds like he is suffering >> severe impact to his business. >> >> Owen >> >> On Feb 22, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Hammer wrote: >> >> > I'm not argueing that at all. But it wasn't relevent to the question at >> > hand. And depending on the scale of your business dumping providers is >> not >> > something done on a whim. It's not like your fed up with DSL and want to >> > convert to Cable. >> > >> > >> > -Hammer- >> > >> > "I was a normal American nerd." >> > -Jack Herer >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Bret Clark <bcl...@spectraaccess.com >> >wrote: >> > >> >> On 02/22/2011 12:23 PM, Hammer wrote: >> >> >> >>> As Max stated, you can set triggers based on thresholds that are >> monitered >> >>> via multiple methods in Cisco IOS. That way you could force the route >> down >> >>> dynamically. There's always a risk when letting the machines do the >> >>> thinking >> >>> but this would help in situations like this. Can't speak for other >> vendors >> >>> but I'm sure the features are similar. >> >>> >> >>> Well as someone else stated, if an upstream provider can't provide BGP >> >> reliably then it's time to give them the boot. Once in a year, okay, >> but >> >> beyond that, then it's time to read riot act with that provider. >> >> Bret >> >> >> >> >> >> >
