Re: Equinix IX Port Moves

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:

> The second option.
>
> Well, there is the first under process too, but the second is the priority
> at the moment.
​it's a little mystifying that they can't arrange a 'hot cut' of the link
then between the 2 locations.
They were able to do this for an org I don't work for but help out... for 2
links in a cage->cage move event just a little less than a year ago
actually.​



> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog () ics-il net>
> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org>
> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 9:46:17 AM
> Subject: Re: Equinix IX Port Moves
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Mike Hammett < nanog () ics-il net > wrote:
>
>
> Who has moved an Equinix IX port? We're told that it's a full
> cancellation, re-order, re IPs, re-peering, etc.
>
> Can anyone lend any input either way on that?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> there are 2 meanings (at least) to 'move', did you mean:
> 1) move port from 1G to 10G (or 'change speed')
> 2) move port from cage/rack1 to cage/rack2 (endpoint move in your space(s)
> )
>
>
> <blockquote>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> </blockquote>