On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:33:12 CDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> No, a true routing loop will transit several hops and end back up at the same
> routers.
Out of curiosity, what's the biggest loop anybody's come across? I see
plenty of "two adjacent routers pointing at each other", and the occasional
3
Sena, Rich wrote:
Man it's been awhile...
"Godwin..." errr maybe it's "Nazi" - or perhaps "Boursey" damn how do
we stop this again?!?!
Please only reply if you remember the magic word to make this thread
stop!
I think it is several words:
No operational discussions on NANOG.
--
Requiescas i
rom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Paul Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: nanog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Fri Jul 18 22:33:12 2008
Subject: Re: Ubiquity<->Mzima routing loop
No, a true routing loop will transit several hops and end back up at
the same routers. A bounci
ts default gateway.
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Wall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/18/2008 10:25 PM AST
To: Guy Shields
Cc: nanog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ubiquity<->Mzima routing loop
Isn't that what a routing loop is, when it loops back out to the
tr
Paul Wall wrote:
Isn't that what a routing loop is, when it loops back out to the
transit/interface from which it entered?
Of course.
I think the sensitivity comes in to whether the diagnosis "routing loop"
is one of the cause or effect.
I.E.
"this routing loop appears to show a network pro
h a weight of 254.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Paul Wall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 07/18/2008 06:57 PM AST
> To: "William Pitcock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Ubiquity<->Mzima routing loop
>
AIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Ubiquity<->Mzima routing loop
I'd like to rip on Mzima as much as the next guy, but I'm not sure how
they could "fix" this routing loop, shy of some creative ACLs.
You should try contacting Ubiquity, as this traceroute looks like an
issue on thei
I'd like to rip on Mzima as much as the next guy, but I'm not sure how
they could "fix" this routing loop, shy of some creative ACLs.
You should try contacting Ubiquity, as this traceroute looks like an
issue on their (Mzima's customer's) side.
Paul Wall
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:27 PM, William
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 03:49:25PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
[snip]
> I'm aware what side it's on. However, I didn't have contact information
> for an actual human on either side of the link, so I posted on [EMAIL
> PROTECTED]
[snip]
There's a lot of rolodex resources out there that can get y
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 13:32 -0700, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:02 PM, William Pitcock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sadly, I don't have any contact with either one, but I do need to be
> > able to access that server, and it's responsible admin is no where to be
> >
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:02 PM, William Pitcock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sadly, I don't have any contact with either one, but I do need to be
> able to access that server, and it's responsible admin is no where to be
> found.
common sense and courtesy says you should contact ubiquity,
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 12:40 -0700, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:27 PM, William Pitcock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can someone at Ubiquity or Mzima fix this routing loop:
> >
>
> How long ago did you contact Ubiquity or Mzima?
>
Sadly, I don't have any co
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:27 PM, William Pitcock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can someone at Ubiquity or Mzima fix this routing loop:
>
How long ago did you contact Ubiquity or Mzima?
Hi,
Can someone at Ubiquity or Mzima fix this routing loop:
traceroute to hg.atheme.org (72.37.225.164), 30 hops max, 40 byte
packets
1 64.62.134.193 12.402 ms 12.370 ms 12.363 ms
2 ge5-0.cr01.ord01.mzima.net (206.223.119.62) 16.003 ms 15.985 ms
15.964 ms
3 ge0-ubiquity.cust.ord01.mzim
14 matches
Mail list logo
