RE: Operational issue: Packet loss at Pacbell NAP

[In the message entitled "RE: Operational issue: Packet loss at Pacbell NAP" on Mar 31, 16:49, "Ellis, Stephen C (PTSS-scellis)" writes:]

> Nope. The problem is link congestion between SJC and SFO. Pacbell
> was apparently not monitoring this. By rerouting some traffic, they
> were able to shift the peers that it affected. It, with 100%
> certainty,
> is within the cloud that makes up the PB NAP.
We've identified the facts that occured in this particular situation.
The problem was definitely **not** due to link congestion as we have
stats on the utilization of the OC3s. The rerouting which occured as a
result of this problem has been corrected.

Not to beat you too badly, but the situation yesterday I was told was
due to saturated trunks between SJC and SFO. Moving traffic from those
saturated trunks immediately alleviated the problem on those peers.

The problem identified today (with different peers) I was told was due to an
ATM routing problem.

There are several different problems active, I suspect. As each of the NAPs
get to high utilization levels, various failure modes will manifest.