On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote:
> The second option. > > Well, there is the first under process too, but the second is the priority > at the moment. > > > it's a little mystifying that they can't arrange a 'hot cut' of the link then between the 2 locations. They were able to do this for an org I don't work for but help out... for 2 links in a cage->cage move event just a little less than a year ago actually. > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> > To: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> > Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 9:46:17 AM > Subject: Re: Equinix IX Port Moves > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: > > > Who has moved an Equinix IX port? We're told that it's a full > cancellation, re-order, re IPs, re-peering, etc. > > Can anyone lend any input either way on that? > > > > > > > > there are 2 meanings (at least) to 'move', did you mean: > 1) move port from 1G to 10G (or 'change speed') > 2) move port from cage/rack1 to cage/rack2 (endpoint move in your space(s) > ) > > > <blockquote> > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > </blockquote> > > >
