5mb limit ingressing/traversing their backbone? Or 5mb limit to their router's control plane? Important to differentiate between the two. I'd call the former totally unacceptable, and actionable per SLA 'till resolved (besides, whoever got taken down by a multi-gigabit PING FLOOD?); the latter is a concerned provider appropriately covering their base (I'd police random ICMP to even less, say 128kb). Paul On 5/19/08, Drew Weaver <drew.weaver@thenap.com> wrote:
The only issue I had with them recently was the aforementioned 5Mbps ICMP rate-limiting on an inappropriately sized circuit and not understanding why I thought it was inappropriate to apply that filter to circuits of any size without any thought to how it would (to a lesser extent things like network performance monitoring systems made by companies such as Avaya (RS) and InterNAP) if the 5Mbps filled up and they began dropping ICMP. (for no reason).
-Drew
-----Original Message----- From: Erich Hohermuth [mailto:eh@profzone.ch] Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 7:30 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: [NANOG] Installation troubles with GlobalCrossing
Dear list,
Thanks to everyone who has respond to me by privat mails.
I just want to ask if anyone else have major troubles to install new or upgrade services with Global Crossing ?
It seems that I'm not the only one who has troubles with installations and trouble tickets in the past 12 months. I also get some offers from competitors which promise to bring up a point two point link within 10 days.
Thanks Eric
_______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
_______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
-- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com