nanog mailing list archives
Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice?
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer () mauigateway com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:32:41 -0800
----- jay () west net wrote: ------ <snip> thing and horrendously long circuit numbers including CLLI codes such as 101/T3/SNLOCAGTH07/SNLOCA01K15. ------------------------------- That is what's used by the transport section (I'm in the IP section) in the company where I work. Even though the description is long, I use the entire CID from the carrier along with something that makes sense to me and the NOC folk that'll be troubleshooting before I get to it. Long in information many times means more work done by the first level folks. Here's a couple of examples: "LAG 29 LINK 1 for CKT ID: 101/GE1/HNLLHIMN37W/HNLLHIMN53W" "101/GE1/HNLLHIMN37W/HNLLHIMN44W to Cisco 3750 7th floor data center" "OC-12 POS line to AT&T: CIDs-> HT: 82.ODGS.xxxxxx.HAWT AT&T: IVEC.xxxxxx..ATI" Long? Yes. Helpful to the first level NOC folks? Yes. scott
Current thread:
- Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Jay Hennigan (Jan 16)
- Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Alex H. Ryu (Jan 16)
- Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Justin M. Streiner (Jan 16)
- Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Peter Wohlers (Jan 16)
- Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Jeff MacDonald (Jan 17)
- Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Josh Potter (Jan 18)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Circuit numbering scheme - best practice? Scott Weeks (Jan 16)