We were on on 4323 - we are still peered to 4323 (from a config stand point) - but the world sees us thru 3549
It is a mess on convergence On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 3:24 PM, joel jaeggli <joe...@bogus.com> wrote: > On 10/28/16 12:18 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: > > Level3 hasn't even finished migrating its TWTelecom customers to the L3 > AS yes, and it's been years. So I don't think you can expect any faster > transition for CL. > 3549 still exists... > > -mel beckman > > > >> On Oct 28, 2016, at 2:16 PM, Timothy Lister <incu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> So if this went through, how would it happen? Does 3356 (L3) absorb > 209's > >> (CL) infrastructure and slowly make customers change their peering > config > >> to hit 3356 instead? > >> > >> You make a good point, I have at least a couple clients that peer to > both > >> providers for redundancy. One of which just recently signed an agreement > >> with CenturyLink for the sole purpose of fail over. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> Re: CenturyLink in Advanced Talks to Merge With Level 3 Communications - > >> Interweb is doomed > >> From: Jima <na...@jima.us> > >> To: <nanog@nanog.org> > >>>>> On 10/27/2016 12:36, Nevin Gonsalves via NANOG wrote: > >>>>> :-) > >> http://www.wsj.com/articles/centurylink-in-advanced-talks- > to-merge-with-level-3-communications-1477589011 > >> > >> > >> This is great! Except for all of their mutual customers who had circuits > >> from both for redundancy. (See also: Level 3's and TWTC's mutual > >> customers, and probably a long list of other M&A I'm not thinking of > >> off-hand.) > >> > >> OK, I lied about it being great anyway. > >> > >> Jima > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> Re: CenturyLink in Advanced Talks to Merge With Level 3 Communications - > >> Interweb is doomed > >> From: Jima <na...@jima.us> > >> To: <nanog@nanog.org> > > > >
