Well, when I called them, the guy that I spoke with seemed a little clueless and wanted to keep blaming the problem on MCI. I had done some traceroutes and had seen other areas using various backbones having problems also. When I was on the phone with the guy, when he still maintained it was a problem on our side, I simply asked him what their connectivity was like, or what their network looked like. He had to put me on hold for several minutes, came back, and then started saying something about "We are working on a contractual agreement with C&W, but it will be approximately 40 days before we work that out." I had another coworker call later on..and that is what they had told us that time. I honestly don't have any idea what their network looks like, nor who they have connectivity and/or peearing with. This is just the information they had given us. They didn't give us really anymore..and the person that gave us this bit, seemed a little more clueful about what was going on. I'm just glad that they are finally acknowledging that there is _some_ problem on _their_ side of things. Now...hopefully they will have it fixed in the 40 days they are maintaining. Erica L Johansson Network Administrator ServiceCo/Road Runner On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, Adam Rothschild wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, Erica L Johansson wrote:
Exodus net admitted that they have a bandwidth problem to MCI, and their border routers are severely congested. They are currently in the process of increasing their bandwidth with C&W. Their estimate (in their own words) is approximately 40 days until the circuits are upgraded.
I'm not sure I follow. What circuits is Exodus going to upgrade?
AFAIK, Exodus has no circuits directly to MCI^H^H^HCW (for private peering)... Rather, Exodus exchanges traffic with CW at the MAE/NAP's, and via their Savvis transit ATM VC's (one to the Savvis NYC PNAP at 67 Broad St., and another so some Savvis PNAP in LA).
Some clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, -asr