nanog mailing list archives
Re: Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]]
From: jmalcolm () uraeus com
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:21:49 +0000
jdupuy-list () socket net writes:
Again, I'd be interested in hearing from one of the bigger ones on this: UUNet, AT&T, Sprint, Level3, QWest.... If you can't say anything, I understand.
You don't need them to say anything - just look at what they are advertising. Are they advertising each other's routes? If not, then they aren't given each other transit.
Current thread:
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] John Dupuy (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] David Barak (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] John Dupuy (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] Stephen J. Wilcox (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] Patrick W Gilmore (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] Dorian Kim (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] Richard A Steenbergen (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] jdupuy-list (Mar 29)
- Re: Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] jmalcolm (Mar 30)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] John Dupuy (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] David Barak (Mar 29)
- Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]] Leo Bicknell (Mar 30)