On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
[snip]
> Can anyone from Level3 say how this will impact customer BGP filters. Will L3
> keep working with the last data sync they got from altdb?
Yes, Level 3 will continue to use the last data mirrored and archived. New
filters are not pushed dail
Level 3 provides best effort IPv6 support with no SLA to current
Internet customers. As mentioned IPv6 is currently being provided
via tunnels to the customer's existing router.
There is a simple service agreement addendum and form to fill
out for relevant config bits.
Sorry you get such a res
Drew-
Contact me offlist, that CAR router is our border. We pass to
another entity after that.
regards
-Craig
* Drew Weaver was thought to have said:
> 915 ms17 ms17 ms ae-93-93.ebr3.Washington1.Level3.net
> [4.69.134.173]
> 1022 ms18 ms18 ms ae-3.ebr3.NewYork1.Le
On Jul 26, 2008, at 7:49 AM, John Menerick wrote:
I was seeing the same thing around the same time. However, the
"issue" corrected itself after 10 minutes. Not quite long enough to
get Level3 support on the phone. Support's answer: "OOps, our
bad."
John Menerick
http://www.icehax
* Jon Lewis was thought to have said:
> If someone from Level3 could tell me why routes tagged with
>
> 65000:0 and/or 65000:1239 don't actually stop those routes from being
> advertised to 1239, I'd appreciate it.
You should start to see them disappear shortly. On route-views they're
starting
* John Payne was thought to have said:
>
> I thought perhaps we'd found the reason behind the tax^surcharge in
> the other thread... a community tax :)
No, that's a pass through charge that goes to epperson.
No native service available but there is a trial tunneled IPv6 service
with best effort support with *no SLA* available to current Level 3
Internet customers. IPv6 is currently being provided via IPv4 tunnels
to the customer's existing router and supported by a handful of
engineers.
Ther
No rate limits, tunnel termination in DC, San Jose, Dallas,
Amsterdam, London. You can request termination to multiple
routers for diversity.
* Justin Shore was thought to have said:
> That's good to know. Do you know if there are any rate-limits that
> would apply to this trial service? Any i
Most likely the issue was communication between the NOC and the
service management center. The NOC deals with the core facing events
versus the SMC which takes the incoming calls from the customers. In
this case the issue was identified and resolved in the NOC.
Perhaps the RFO was not poste
Some infrastructure blocks are not routed to portions of the network
but should not affect ultimate reachability as long as the correct
loopbacks and directly connected networks are advertised properly.
regards
On Aug 27, 2008, at 6:42 PM, William R. Lorenz wrote:
Has anyone noticed signif
10 matches
Mail list logo
