On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Paul Wall <pauldotwall@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's precisely the problem, that the issue could not have been handled "though other methods".
I think it should be clear to those posting here as a last ditch effort that they should certainly outline the steps they've already taken -- basically justifying their post to NANOG: "I tried X, waited Y, got Z, and now I'm here"
I agree NANOG is not a replacement for NOCs, but what about when the NOCs are utterly useless and the issue is global in scope?
that's definitely one of the reasons *I* think this mailing lists exists. infact I bet if I wasn't lazy I could find something to that effect in the charter or nanog.org site.
Given the parties involved, I'd like to think that Logan tried to go through standard channels prior to posting. Please realize this is no slight against nLayer, but rather, "the new AT&T" and their concept of customer service.
SBC/ATT/whatever peering ops was always my absolute favorite to work with back when I actually worked in a NOC. hopefully that hasn't changed much in the past year.
Paul