Uh. Why are you yelling at PSI when you have failed to do your own calculations? Perhaps they have taken data from archive.route-views.org to determine what the actual loss of connectivity was. I don't have the time to go out and validate the PSINet claims of how much of the net is gone for them and their (single-homed) customers. Perhaps someone who is more of a data processing person can go out and provide some interesting data, such as Number of ASNs single-homed (based on route-views data) Top 5/10/20/25 providers based on as-path Number of networks/ips/ASNs behind each of those top 5/10/20/25 that would be missing connectivity. - Jared On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:55:14PM -0400, Christopher A. Woodfield wrote:
THE UNITED STATES and Offnet Connectivity Cable & Wireless chose to terminate connectivity with PSINet on 2June01. Over 90% of the traffic that used to be routed through C&W is now being routed via other means through our robust global free peering infrastructure. The remaining 10% or so represents C&W customers that have been deliberately cut off from PSINet by C&W. While PSINet is ready and willing to re-establish connectivity with C&W at any time, it is up to C&W to choose to reverse their previous decision. In the meantime, PSINet can offer services directly to those C&W customers that are affected.
OK, PSI seems to assert that 90% of C&W networks are still accessable from PSI customers. NANOG research so far has determined that this is definitely *not* the case. If anyone has evidence to support PSI's claim, please post.
Dear PSI: this may not be directly your fault, but dammit, own up to the scope of the issue. It's in your interest to take advantage of being the "good guy" for once, so don't ruin it by lying about the scope of the problem.
I don't think that this is going to be solved by C&W reversing themselves; I think PSI is going to have to get itself some transit, and quickly.
-C
On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 04:18:48PM -0700, John Starta wrote:
See PSINet's network status page (http://www.psi.com/cgi-bin/netstatus.pl5) for a possible answer.
jas
At 06:22 PM 6/4/01 -0400, Vivien M. wrote:
I suppose now PSI gets to learn the hard way what happens when they scared half their peers away (to be polite...), and now find that a bunch of the other half are now turning down their PSI peering links. (BTW, has it been established here whether PSI or CW is to blame for this?)
-- --------------------------- Christopher A. Woodfield rekoil@semihuman.com
PGP Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB887618B
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.