Re: Curiosity about AS3356 L3/CenturyLink network resiliency (in general)

[Rubens Kuhl <rubensk () gmail com>]

CenturyLink bought Level 3, which bought Global Crossing, which bought
Impsat; this makes every market unique, for the good and bad of it.

What I have as a customer feeling is that Global Crossing was the most
quality-minded of the 4, while the other 3 is/were more "take what we give
you and shut up".


Rubens


On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 1:59 PM, David Hubbard <
dhubbard () dino hostasaurus com> wrote:

> I’m curious if anyone who’s used 3356 for transit has found shortcomings
> in how their peering and redundancy is configured, or what a normal
> expectation to have is.  The Tampa Bay market has been completely down for
> 3356 IP services twice so far this year, each for what I’d consider an
> unacceptable period of time (many hours).  I’m learning that the entire
> market is served by just two fiber routes, through cities hundreds of miles
> away in either direction.  So, basically two fiber cuts, potentially 1000+
> miles apart, takes the entire region down.  The most recent occurrence was
> a week or so ago when a Miami-area cut and an Orange, Texas cut (1287
> driving miles apart) took IP services down for hours.  It did not take
> point to point circuits to out of market locations down, so that suggests
> they even have the ability to be more redundant and simply choose not to.
>
> I feel like it’s not unreasonable to expect more redundancy, or a much
> smaller attack surface given a disgruntled lineman who knows the routes
> could take an entire region down with a planned cut four states apart.
> Maybe other regions are better designed?  Or are my expectations
> unreasonable?  I carry three peers in that market, so it hasn’t been
> outage-causing, but I use 3356 in other markets too, and have plans for
> more, but it makes me wonder if I just haven't had the pleasure of similar
> outages elsewhere yet and I should factor that expectation into the
> design.  It creates a problem for me in one location where I can only get
> them and Cogent, since Cogent can't be relied on for IPv6 service, which I
> need.
>
> Thanks