North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: PSI woes
- From: Robert Bowman
- Date: Wed Jun 25 10:50:30 1997
Looks like Dave has already prepended.. I'll bet PSI is LPing the PX
link over IXP peers, if the path exists on both.. which basically
has made all of Dave's attempts futile (meds, prepends, inconsisent,
> Not that I havee actually seen this problem because we don't buy transit
> from MCI, but...
> You may want to try adding a few additional copies of your AS to your MCI
> advertisement "prepend as 65536 65536 65536" where 65536 is actually your
> AS. It largely depends on _how_ PSI is implementing their policy. It
> could just be that all routes learned from their West Coast router (i.e.
> a Border Router) are given a lower priority than private connect routers.
> I guess a PSI person would be much better at answering with specifics. I
> know I have seen customers get traffic flows to jump through the most
> insane paths just be adding god awful AS lengths to their announcements.
> Hope it helps,
> On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Dave Rand wrote:
> > Is anyone else having routing problems with PSI?
> > On the left coast, we peer with PSI. We buy transit from MCI. PSI
> > recently (about a month ago) installed a broken localpref to prefer
> > their private MCI connection. It doesn't matter what we advertise
> > to MCI (double-hop, origin incomplete), PSI still uses their private
> > MCI peering - which of course is full during the day, so PSI
> > customers get packet loss.
> > Naturally, the problem does not exist on the right coast :-)
> > I've called the NOC about 20 times now, trying to get it resolved.
> > I've been promised, multiple times, that it would be fixed, only
> > to get told today that "it's a policy issue". What? :-(
> > Anyone else having trouble?
> > --
> > Dave Rand
> > firstname.lastname@example.org
> > http://www.bungi.com