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

[baldur.norddahl at gmail.com (Baldur Norddahl)]

What happened to do not trust anyone? Create your own resiliency by being
multihomed to as many transits you can afford.

You need the ability to shutdown a transit that is having trouble. It
happens to all of them.

Regards
Baldur


ons. 16. maj 2018 19.02 skrev David Hubbard <dhubbard at dino.hostasaurus.com>:

> Iâ??m curious if anyone whoâ??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 Iâ??d consider an
> unacceptable period of time (many hours).  Iâ??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 itâ??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 hasnâ??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
>
>
>