Re: only WV FIBER now peering with Atrivo / Intercage
Anton's post that GX is still providing them transit is a bit curious, since I was under the impression GX had severed all ties with Atrivo. But the table does not lie, a path of "174 3549 27595" is clearly transit. GX, care to comment?
After poking for a bit, it's unclear what, if anything, GX is or isn't doing here.
Does it matter? The implication of this thread is the imposition of an internet death penalty on this AS. In which case people will have to hound each AS they're seen behind, whatever they're providing, and that will change as they run for cover. This seems a change of tactic from just null routing people you don't like on your own network brandon
Brandon Butterworth wrote:
Anton's post that GX is still providing them transit is a bit curious, since I was under the impression GX had severed all ties with Atrivo. But the table does not lie, a path of "174 3549 27595" is clearly transit. GX, care to comment?
After poking for a bit, it's unclear what, if anything, GX is or isn't doing here.
Does it matter? The implication of this thread is the imposition of an internet death penalty on this AS. I vote yea.
On Sep 7, 2008, at 8:16 AM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
Brandon Butterworth wrote:
Anton's post that GX is still providing them transit is a bit curious, since I was under the impression GX had severed all ties with Atrivo. But the table does not lie, a path of "174 3549 27595" is clearly transit. GX, care to comment?
After poking for a bit, it's unclear what, if anything, GX is or isn't doing here.
Does it matter? The implication of this thread is the imposition of an internet death penalty on this AS. I vote yea.
Seconded. (Thirded?) -- TTFN, patrick
Sorry for the confusing as-paths, folks. As it happens, the AS174 update-group that my upstream was peered within stopped transporting updates sometime yesterday. A Cogent engineer was able to fix what appears to be an IOS bug shortly after I sent my note yesterday. -Tk On 9/7/08, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net> wrote:
On Sep 7, 2008, at 8:16 AM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
Brandon Butterworth wrote:
Anton's post that GX is still providing them transit is a bit curious, since I was under the impression GX had severed all ties with Atrivo. But the table does not lie, a path of "174 3549 27595" is clearly transit. GX, care to comment?
After poking for a bit, it's unclear what, if anything, GX is or isn't doing here.
Does it matter? The implication of this thread is the imposition of an internet death penalty on this AS. I vote yea.
Seconded. (Thirded?)
-- TTFN, patrick
participants (4)
-
Andrew D Kirch -
Anton Kapela -
Brandon Butterworth -
Patrick W. Gilmore