Dear members,
I just want to ask if anyone else have major troubles to install new or
upgrade services with Global Crossing ?
The story:
Last year on December we ordered two layer2 point to point connections
based on gigabit ethernet connections. The main idea was to directly
connect to the peering point. After waiting 3 months and lots of mails
they get the right hardware in place but now 6 months later we still
don't have a running service, because they just implement something with
tagged interfaces on one the peering point site without asking.
Regards
Eric
Hi Eric,
I had a similar problem with Time Warner in Souther California. The point to point was office <-> data center.
The issue turned out to be the tagged packet for our tunnel were too large for the current layer two network. They increased the packet size and all was good. It also took 6 months to get this line up and running as promised. This required a change to the config and a reboot of some gear along the path. Our CFO and an attorney sent a letter stating that if the line was not up by X date, the contract would be considered null and void. They delivered.
Hope this helps,
Eddy
Hi Eric,
Sorry you're having troubles. If you send me an email with your
customer information or give me a call I'll look into this and get
you sorted out.
Dave Siegel
VP Global IP/Data Services Product Management
716-408-2608
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 09:38:04AM +0200, Erich Hohermuth reportedly typed:
Dear list,
Thanks to everyone who has respond to me by privat mails.
I just want to ask if anyone else have major troubles to install new or
upgrade services with Global Crossing ?
It seems that I'm not the only one who has troubles with installations
and trouble tickets in the past 12 months. I also get some offers from
competitors which promise to bring up a point two point link within 10
days.
Thanks
Eric
The only issue I had with them recently was the aforementioned 5Mbps ICMP rate-limiting on an inappropriately sized circuit and not understanding why I thought it was inappropriate to apply that filter to circuits of any size without any thought to how it would (to a lesser extent things like network performance monitoring systems made by companies such as Avaya (RS) and InterNAP) if the 5Mbps filled up and they began dropping ICMP. (for no reason).
-Drew
5mb limit ingressing/traversing their backbone?
Or 5mb limit to their router's control plane?
Important to differentiate between the two. I'd call the former
totally unacceptable, and actionable per SLA 'till resolved (besides,
whoever got taken down by a multi-gigabit PING FLOOD?); the latter is
a concerned provider appropriately covering their base (I'd police
random ICMP to even less, say 128kb).
Paul
5mb limit ingressing/traversing their backbone?
Or 5mb limit to their router's control plane?
Important to differentiate between the two. I'd call the former
totally unacceptable, and actionable per SLA 'till resolved (besides,
whoever got taken down by a multi-gigabit PING FLOOD?); the latter is
seen them.. they can be painful 
a former customer got some
large/fragmented icmp flood during a may-day event as I recall.
a concerned provider appropriately covering their base (I'd police
random ICMP to even less, say 128kb).
at 1mbps rate-limited customers complained that 'your link is dropping
packets' (when they do a rapid-ping off their edge device with 4000
byte packets... which went over the 1mbps policer). There's certainly
some limit to be used, somewhere between 128k -> 2-4mbps. Also, it
highly depends on edge platform of course
-Chris