Re: local_preference for transit traffic?

2011-12-18 Thread Mark Tinka
On Sunday, December 18, 2011 12:32:03 AM Matthew Petach wrote: > I've been able to negotiate peering+transit relationships > with providers, but only by threat of total revenue loss; > ie "we currently pay you $x million/year; we want your > on-net routes as settlement-free routes, and will > con

Re: local_preference for transit traffic?

2011-12-18 Thread Mark Tinka
On Sunday, December 18, 2011 02:35:37 AM Joel jaeggli wrote: > In the circumstances where I've seen this are rare... We > have had transit providers that we used who also peered > with us on exchange fabrics for v6 that's about it. Funny, we have something similar :-). But yes, we've seen this i

Re: local_preference for transit traffic?

2011-12-18 Thread Mark Tinka
On Sunday, December 18, 2011 04:49:46 AM Adam Rothschild wrote: > Indeed, the old adage of "once a customer, never a peer" > could never be wronger. Socially, "once a customer, then a peer, then a customer again" is even more interesting yet. The second instance of "customer" could rise during

Savvis Route Server/Looking Glass

2011-12-18 Thread Keegan Holley
Does anyone know of a working Savvis route server or looking glass. The http://as3561lg.savvis.net/lg.html site doesn't seem to be able to query BGP routes. For example it says they don't have a route to 12.0/9 which seems to be a pretty common aggregate. The traceroute tool works normally thoug