RE: Problems with either Cisco.com or AT&T?
I can't speak for Cisco or Cisco IT, but as evidenced by this email, at least part of our connectivity is up. No doubt someone official is looking at it as we speak. (I'll just lurk Nanog to get the skinny)..
A brief look at routeviews shows www.cisco.com (198.133.219.25) originating from AS109 (Cisco) and transiting via AS7132 (AT&T/SBC) and AS7018 (AT&T). Thus I suspect this is an issue with AS109 (Cisco) and not with their providers. Though, I do feel wrong using the plural "providers" in this case...
-Benson
Yep; when I sent my previous note, AS109 was still originating routes. But packets seemed to die at the border router. Now I'm also seeing routes via AS701 (UU/Verizon Biz) and AS1239 (Sprint) as well as AT&T, but still no connectivity. A few moments ago I was getting a response from the www.cisco.com website, but it was a 403 Forbidden response. Thus I suspect that it's not even a network problem so much as a website (LB, server, etc) issue, or a DDoS attack, etc. (Perhaps operators are changing route policy, trying to "fix" the wrong issue?) -Benson
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Airhart [mailto:mairhart@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 3:06 PM To: Schliesser, Benson Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: Problems with either Cisco.com or AT&T?
I can't speak for Cisco or Cisco IT, but as evidenced by this email, at least part of our connectivity is up.
No doubt someone official is looking at it as we speak. (I'll just lurk Nanog to get the skinny)..
A brief look at routeviews shows www.cisco.com (198.133.219.25) originating from AS109 (Cisco) and transiting via AS7132 (AT&T/SBC) and AS7018 (AT&T). Thus I suspect this is an issue with AS109 (Cisco) and not with their providers. Though, I do feel wrong using the plural "providers" in this case...
-Benson
participants (2)
-
Michael Airhart -
Schliesser, Benson