Mr Seastrom, How many times have you seen people on the NANOG list publicly condemn notes such as yours that are taken to the NANOG list before being taken through proper network operations channels? I really get tired of listening to these sorts of notes when they involve other providers so I would appreciate if you have a response to this message, that you take it up with me (or our NOC) offline instead of involving the whole NANOG community. Regarding the incident you complain about, first of all, you called the wrong number. Advantis has many other networks to support besides our Internet service. You talked to someone in first line support who was trying to help you get to the NOC that manages our Internet service. I don't know all the specifics of your conversation with this person, but from the tone of your note, I suspect you may have had something to do with the argument since you didn't understand that we do in fact have several inter networks to support. In the future, try NOC@IBM.NET and you will get to the bottom of the problem. Secondly, we brought up peering *yesterday* with your upstream provider and a typo was made in the configuration which resulted in your getting the extra routes. This situation was promptly fixed once it really got to the NOC. Why you seem to have the need to publicly criticize our network with false statements such as 'this condition has persisted for several months' is beyond me. In the future, you may want to try being a bit more patient. Sincerely, Dimitri Krinos Network Architecture IBM Global Services At 08:38 PM 4/21/97 -0400, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
Whilst investigating why my routing table size suddenly jumped by 5k routes, I discovered that Advantis (AS 2685 at MAE-E, origin AS 3082) was leaking all sorts of more-specifics for various networks into the bgp mesh. Yeah, I know I should be running bogon filters...
Anyway, I called up their NOC to complain, and when I explained the situation I was asked which Internet I was calling about. Then when I asked to be transferred to a supervisor, the "support" person became argumentative and didn't want to transfer me. I had to be rudely direct and demand to be transferred before I was put on hold for five minutes and then informed that the supervisor was out to dinner.
Come on Advantis, get it together.
---Rob
At 09:03 PM 4/21/97 -0400, you wrote:
I have just been informed by a couple of people that this condition has persisted for several months. One of my upstreams must not be filtering Advantis' crapola.
And so I say once again: Come ON advantis, get it together!
---Rob
From: "Dimitri Krinos" <krinos@VNET.IBM.COM> Cc: nanog@merit.edu, noc@ibm.net Mr Seastrom, How many times have you seen people on the NANOG list publicly condemn notes such as yours that are taken to the NANOG list before being taken through proper network operations channels? I really get tired of listening to these sorts of notes when they involve other providers so I would appreciate if you have a response to this message, that you take it up with me (or our NOC) offline instead of involving the whole NANOG community. I'm not in the habit of taking flames publicly with a request to follow up privately. Regarding the incident you complain about, first of all, you called the wrong number. Advantis has many other networks to support besides our Internet service. Perhaps, then, you should consider updating your InterNIC records to reflect the correct phone number and the noc@ibm.net address. If you don't properly advertise the proper channels, you can hardly expect me to follow them. A good starting point might be for you to check _all_ your InterNIC records and make sure the phone numbers and contact information on them are correct and up to date. You talked to someone in first line support who was trying to help you get to the NOC that manages our Internet service. I don't know all the specifics of your conversation with this person, but from the tone of your note, I suspect you may have had something to do with the argument since you didn't understand that we do in fact have several inter networks to support. In the future, try NOC@IBM.NET and you will get to the bottom of the problem. Pardon my lack of patience, but when I call up and explain to the NOC person on the other end of the phone that this is a problem with Advantis' Internet service and that they are leaking internal routes into the global BGP mesh, I expect them to say something like "please hold; I'll connect you to the right people" rather than "what Internet is this?". That reflects rather poorly on your training process for your first-string helpdesk people, and moreover when I asked (nicely the first time!) to escalate to their manager, YOUR EMPLOYEE ARGUED WITH ME. Please take into account my exasperated mindset after dealing with this kind of unprofessional behavior before you get self-righteous about the tone of my posting. Secondly, we brought up peering *yesterday* with your upstream provider and a typo was made in the configuration which resulted in your getting the extra routes. This situation was promptly fixed once it really got to the NOC. After much back and forth and phone calls to me asking whether I was still seeing the routes, yes. "Promptly" in this case meaning about 18 hours after the problem was first brought to your attention. I hope I don't ever have to deal with that help-desk for anything of an operationally critical nature. Why you seem to have the need to publicly criticize our network with false statements such as 'this condition has persisted for several months' is beyond me. I got a message from one of your other peers saying that you had been leaking the routes to him for months and that he had tried getting you to clean up your act but ended up just filtering you. Before you accuse me of making false statements, perhaps you ought to follow up with that other ISP. In the future, you may want to try being a bit more patient. Yeah, I should lower my expectations a bit. ---Rob
participants (2)
-
Dimitri Krinos
-
Robert E. Seastrom