nanog mailing list archives
Re: cisco.com
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme () americafree tv>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:24:33 -0400
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Scott Wolfe wrote:
No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and 174).-Scott W
Through Cogent tme$ traceroute 198.133.219.26traceroute to 198.133.219.26 (198.133.219.26), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 dmz-mct2.americafree.tv (63.105.122.1) 0.673 ms 0.394 ms 0.243 ms 2 gi0-7.na21.b002176-1.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.99.206.153) 0.690 ms 0.721 ms 0.970 ms 3 te9-2.3687.mpd01.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.20.43.49) 0.984 ms 0.965 ms 0.732 ms 4 vl3491.ccr02.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.234) 0.976 ms 0.923 ms 0.726 ms 5 te8-3.ccr02.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.134) 54.971 ms te4-3.ccr02.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.138) 3.705 ms 13.960 ms 6 sl-st30-ash-0-11-3-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.8.205) 1.973 ms 2.089 ms 1.975 ms 7 sl-crs1-dc-0-13-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.25.12) 3.495 ms 3.043 ms 2.734 ms 8 sl-bb20-dc-3-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.15.10) 2.989 ms sl-crs1- rly-0-13-5-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.19.212) 5.824 ms sl-crs1- rly-0-2-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.19.222) 5.860 ms 9 sl-crs1-rly-0-9-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.20.13) 5.613 ms 5.134 ms 4.477 ms 10 sl-gw18-sj-13-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.3.6) 71.695 ms 71.306 ms 72.170 ms
11 144.228.44.14 (144.228.44.14) 72.156 ms 72.895 ms 71.916 ms12 sjce-dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com (128.107.239.89) 72.154 ms 144.228.44.14 (144.228.44.14) 72.301 ms sjce-dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com (128.107.239.89) 72.329 ms 13 sjck-dmzdc-gw2-gig5-2.cisco.com (128.107.224.73) 72.422 ms sjce- dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com (128.107.239.89) 71.853 ms sjck-dmzdc-gw2- gig5-2.cisco.com (128.107.224.73) 72.173 ms 14 sjck-dmzdc-gw2-gig5-2.cisco.com (128.107.224.73) 72.393 ms * 71.648 ms
15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * Could other Sprint routes be affected ? Regards Marshall
-----Original Message----- From: sjk [mailto:sjk () sleepycatz com] Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM To: Dominic J. Eidson Cc: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: cisco.com We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn from 208 and 2828. Facebook seems fine Dominic J. Eidson wrote:Both work from Austin, TX. - d. On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Alex Nderitu wrote:Facebook seems to also be affected. -----Original Message----- From: R. Benjamin Kessler <rbk () mnsginc com> To: nanog () nanog org Subject: cisco.com Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:34:46 -0400 Hey Gang - I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?Thanks, Ben
Current thread:
- Re: cisco.com, (continued)
- Re: cisco.com Alex Nderitu (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Dominic J. Eidson (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Chris Gotstein (Aug 04)
- RE: cisco.com Jason Vanick (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Marshall Eubanks (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Dominic J. Eidson (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com sjk (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Steve Rossen (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com German Martinez (Aug 04)
- RE: cisco.com Moriniaux Michel (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Alex Nderitu (Aug 04)
- RE: cisco.com Scott Wolfe (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Marshall Eubanks (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Bruce Horth (Aug 04)
- RE: cisco.com Hiers, David (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com sjk (Aug 04)
- RE: cisco.com Jonathan Bayles (Aug 04)
- RE: cisco.com Justin Krejci (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Gaurav Taparia (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com Jason Lixfeld (Aug 04)
- Re: cisco.com hank (Aug 04)