RE: Need BGP clueful contact at Global Crossing
On 14 Dec 2006 09:47:46 -0500, Michael A. Patton <MAP@map-ne.com> wrote:
If there are any BGP clueful contacts at Global Crossing listening (or if someone listening wants to forward this to them :-), I would appreciate your getting in touch.
Out of curiousity, why do you think anyone here on NANOG would be willing to bother the clueful contacts they know at provider (X) based on an email like this? It's absolutely content-free.
Having been on both sides of an issue like this one, I'd much rather see polite requests like the original requestor, rather than a 10 page dump on why provider X is severely borked. Good netiquette, seems to me.
On 12/14/06, Lasher, Donn <DLasher@newedgenetworks.com> wrote:
Having been on both sides of an issue like this one, I'd much rather see polite requests like the original requestor, rather than a 10 page dump on why provider X is severely borked. Good netiquette, seems to me.
so NANOG becomes a paging service with no vetting process? if you need people to tap their contacts because you've exhausted every other avenue, you're gonna have to at least explain, if not prove, why you need someone else on this list to go out of their way to put you in contact with someone (grammarians can hit me in a private email for that sentence). and who knows, in the process of reading that 10 page dump, perhaps someone on the list can not only point out the real problem to you - but put you incontact with an even more appropriate contact. seems more efficient for everyone involved, to me.
On 12/14/06, Lasher, Donn <DLasher@newedgenetworks.com> wrote:
On 14 Dec 2006 09:47:46 -0500, Michael A. Patton <MAP@map-ne.com> wrote:
If there are any BGP clueful contacts at Global Crossing listening (or if someone listening wants to forward this to them :-), I would appreciate your getting in touch.
Out of curiousity, why do you think anyone here on NANOG would be willing to bother the clueful contacts they know at provider (X) based on an email like this? It's absolutely content-free.
Having been on both sides of an issue like this one, I'd much rather see polite requests like the original requestor, rather than a 10 page dump on why provider X is severely borked. Good netiquette, seems to me.
10 page dump is excessive; but a one or two line "I'm seeing bad advertisements from AS ZZZZ at the following peering location" goes a long way to explain what the need and urgency is around the issue.
participants (3)
-
Aaron Glenn -
Lasher, Donn -
Matthew Petach