> Anton's post that GX is still providing them transit is a bit curious, since
> I was under the impression GX had severed all ties with Atrivo. But the
> table does not lie, a path of "174 3549 27595" is clearly transit. GX, care
> to comment?
After poking for a bit, it's unclear what, if anything, GX is or isn't
doing here.
Does it matter? The implication of this thread is the imposition of an
internet death penalty on this AS. In which case people will have to
hound each AS they're seen behind, whatever they're providing, and that
will change as they run for cover.
This seems a change of tactic from just null routing people you don't like
on your own network
brandon
Brandon Butterworth wrote:
Anton's post that GX is still providing them transit is a bit curious, since
I was under the impression GX had severed all ties with Atrivo. But the
table does not lie, a path of "174 3549 27595" is clearly transit. GX, care
to comment?
After poking for a bit, it's unclear what, if anything, GX is or isn't
doing here.
Does it matter? The implication of this thread is the imposition of an
internet death penalty on this AS.
I vote yea.
Sorry for the confusing as-paths, folks. As it happens, the AS174
update-group that my upstream was peered within stopped transporting
updates sometime yesterday. A Cogent engineer was able to fix what
appears to be an IOS bug shortly after I sent my note yesterday.
-Tk