On 6/13/15 3:39 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 12/Jun/15 22:25, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote: >> This is the official feedback: >> >> >> >> Level 3's network, alongside some other ISP's, experienced service >> disruptions affecting customers in Europe, Asia and multiple other markets. >> IP, Voice and Content Delivery Network (CDN) services were affected for >> Level 3. The root cause of the issue was isolated to a third party Internet >> Service Provider in Asia that leaked internet routes resulting in traffic >> being sent to a destination that could not route them, which affected IP, >> Voice and CDN services in multiple markets. The issue has been resolved, but >> the provider continues working to determine the specific root cause of the >> incident. At this time, customer services are restored with the exception of >> any that pose any possible risk to the Level 3 network. Maintaining a >> reliable, high-performing network for our customers is our top priority. >> Level 3 will continue to work with the provider to prevent a recurrence. > > While I agree that TM needs to look into its operational procedures, I > think Level(3) needs to shoulder more of the blame, and not simply pass > the buck to TM.
if you localpref your customer up, you should probably not be willing to accept the whole internet from them. > TM has several more upstreams other than Level(3). Assuming their issue > affected all their border routers, we did not see an issue via their > other upstreams other than Level(3) - although this is conjecture on my > part. they also have ~ 180 ASNs in their downstream cone who presumably get a full table have the export policy that did the business in this case applied all the time. > Level(3) should have filtered at the time they were turning up TM. > Simple as that. > > We all know we should never trust customers. So... > > Mark. >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
