nanog mailing list archives

Re: MCI outages


From: "James A. Farrar" <jfarrar () usa net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 18:00:31 -0400

At 06:02 PM 6/24/97 GMT, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Well, we could talk about the repeated outages of MCI....

Ok. 


Last Thursday and again on Sunday, I saw all my traffic between myself
in Michigan and my client in Mississippi going to Atlanta and a black
hole, instead of via Houston and Memphis.  This went for several hours
before I called MCI NOC.

Perhaps you would like to share exactly what you told the MCI NOC and what
their response was? (offline of course, where it should be)
BTW: I would also be interested in knowing the source and destination
addresses you were having problems with.


I used to think the MCI NOC did an exemplary job.  I guess that was when
they were using BBN.

Thank you, I will ignore the second sentence.


Unfortunately, nowadays, IP address of routers are meaningless.  They
want "circuit numbers".  Of course, I have no idea what _their_ circuit
numbers are.  Heck, I don't pay any attention to those under my control.

Yes, circuit numbers usually determine if a person is a customer of
provider X or Y that is calling to utilize provider Z's resources.
Generally, it is a good practice to inquire about problems with the service
provider that provides you services.  


The end result was they refused to take a trouble ticket, even though
it was clearly their mis-routing problem.  They did admit that there
might be maintenance going on in the middle of a Sunday afternoon.


Perhaps an emergency maintenance was happening as a result of an unforeseen
outage as I doubt a large service provider would schedule maintenance on a
Sunday afternoon.

The excuse was that "I'm not a direct customer on either end".  Heck,
even my next level up service provider isn't a direct customer.

The last time I recall MCI uses their customers circuit ID to open a
service inquiry with. They generally don't open tickets for non customers
that can't get to www.xyz.com although, my experience is that they are
generally receptive to a notification of a possible problem that may be
occurring within their network.

Long gone are the days when folks cooperated to resolve trouble reports.


I respectfully disagree with that statement.

And has anyone else noticed a heck of a lot of route flapping between
MCI and PSI, also through Atlanta?


Does this mean you think MCI's use of the Cisco default for route dampening
should be adjusted? 

WSimpson () UMich edu
   Key fingerprint =  17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26  DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
BSimpson () MorningStar com
   Key fingerprint =  2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3  59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2


-jim




Current thread: