nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:32:12 -0400
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Dennis Bohn <bohn () adelphi edu> wrote:
So if someone (say an eyeball network) was putting out a RFQ for a gig say of upstream cxn and wanted to spec full reachability to the full V6 net, what would the wording for that spec look like?
Maybe require something roughly like this in the SLA: "Customer may notify Provider upon discovery of a network Partition. A Partition exists when correct BGP routes available via at least 90% of comparable Internet service providers are absent from Provider's BGP feed or do not otherwise function. Where such Partition persists for at least 6 hours from notification, Provider shall make a 100% service credit starting from notification. Where such Partition persists for at least 24 hours, Customer may terminate this contract without penalty until 30 days following the Partition's end."
Would that get $provider's attention?
No. They'll either agree blindly or consider you a hard case. Either way it won't change their actual behavior. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin () dirtside com bill () herrin us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
Current thread:
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun, (continued)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Christopher Morrow (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Dennis Bohn (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Owen DeLong (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Christopher Morrow (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Mark Tinka (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Owen DeLong (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Mark Tinka (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Owen DeLong (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Mark Tinka (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Baldur Norddahl (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun William Herrin (Mar 16)
- Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun Owen DeLong (Mar 13)