SBCglobal routing loop.

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Logan Rawlins

2008-07-18 17:30:30 UTC

Anyone from sbcglobal out there? i'm seeing a routing loop. Please
contact me off list thanks.

sourceip: 69.16.137.66

tracert 75.58.215.133

Tracing route to adsl-75-58-215-133.dsl.hstntx.sbcglobal.net
[75.58.215.133]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 2 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.113.1
2 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 69.16.137.66
3 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms e-2-21-1000m.core-04.phx2.puregig.net
[69.16.128
.110]
4 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms v303.ar1.ph.hwng.net [69.16.128.137]
5 1 ms 1 ms 2 ms ve1011.r2.ph.hwng.net [69.16.190.161]
6 11 ms 20 ms 11 ms 2-1.r1.la.hwng.net [69.16.191.37]
7 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms vl101.ar1.lax1.us.nlayer.net
[69.31.127.29]
8 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms ae0-60.cr1.lax1.us.nlayer.net
[69.31.127.165]
9 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms ex1-g12-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net
[69.31.127.50]
10 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
11 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

12 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
13 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

14 14 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
15 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

16 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
17 11 ms 12 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

18 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
19 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

20 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
21 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

22 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
23 14 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

24 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
25 11 ms 11 ms 16 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

26 14 ms 11 ms 12 ms 151.164.188.139
27 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

28 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
29 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]

30 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139

Trace complete.

Justin Ream

2008-07-18 17:33:54 UTC

Permalink

Hey we got one too - we're having problems through Level 3.

Hop IP Address Hostname ASN Network Name % Loss Min Latency Latency Avg
Latency Max Latency Std Dev
1 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.1 0 0.37 0.47 0.67 0.06
2 192.168.1.254 192.168.1.254 0 0.66 0.76 1.1 0.07
3 216.31.131.253 s1p20.colo1.lax.ca.us.tierzero.net 11509 TIERZERO-700LA 0
1.98 5.02 133.36 18.37
4 216.31.128.131 asbr2.bsap.lax1.ca.us.tierzero.net 11509 TIERZERO-700LA 0
2.24 6.88 186.29 25.73
5 4.71.142.93 ge-9-23.car2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 3356 LVLT-ORG-4-8 0 2.4
11.92 183.51 36.78
6 4.68.20.69 ae-23-79.car3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 3356 LVLT-ORG-4-8 0 2.79
7.21 70.62 14.11
7 4.68.110.114 sbc-level3-10ge.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 3356 LVLT-ORG-4-8 0
2.89 15.72 207.58 35.31
8 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 5.71 2.77
3.8 21.95 3.22
9 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 76 2.86
36.28 196.96 71.87
10 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 11.11
2.72 7.12 126.74 21.49
11 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 52 3.06
16.62 138.84 37.11
12 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 13.89
2.91 15.14 160.99 35.24
13 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 48.28
2.93 15 92.22 29.64
14 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 2.63 2.76
8.06 122.75 20.76
15 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 61.54
3.18 11.46 49.49 15.65
16 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 0 2.81
8.9 85.47 19.06
17 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 72 3 4
7.61 1.49
18 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 8.33 2.75
8.65 142.66 24.57
19 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 80 3.24
5.15 11.5 3.19
20 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 0 2.91
3.57 9.63 1.06
21 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 68 3
36.53 139.3 57.23
22 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 5.26 2.94
9.24 198.98 32.15
23 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 55.56
3.23 6.79 39.86 9.99
24 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 11.43
3.05 7.4 123.63 21.22
25 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 80 3.17
41.51 194.34 76.41
26 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 7.32 3
7.36 137.2 21.43
27 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 61.54
3.08 7.36 24.55 7.1
28 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 8.33 3.1
7.76 132.98 22.14
29 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 68 3.44
21.86 148.94 48.03
30 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 23.08
3.16 7.74 84.7 17.66

-Justin

Post by Logan Rawlins
Anyone from sbcglobal out there? i'm seeing a routing loop. Please
contact me off list thanks.
sourceip: 69.16.137.66
tracert 75.58.215.133
Tracing route to adsl-75-58-215-133.dsl.hstntx.sbcglobal.net
[75.58.215.133]
1 2 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.113.1
2 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 69.16.137.66
3 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms e-2-21-1000m.core-04.phx2.puregig.net
[69.16.128
.110]
4 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms v303.ar1.ph.hwng.net [69.16.128.137]
5 1 ms 1 ms 2 ms ve1011.r2.ph.hwng.net [69.16.190.161]
6 11 ms 20 ms 11 ms 2-1.r1.la.hwng.net [69.16.191.37]
7 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms vl101.ar1.lax1.us.nlayer.net
[69.31.127.29]
8 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms ae0-60.cr1.lax1.us.nlayer.net
[69.31.127.165]
9 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms ex1-g12-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net
[69.31.127.50]
10 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
11 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
12 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
13 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
14 14 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
15 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
16 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
17 11 ms 12 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
18 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
19 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
20 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
21 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
22 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
23 14 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
24 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
25 11 ms 11 ms 16 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
26 14 ms 11 ms 12 ms 151.164.188.139
27 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
28 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
29 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
30 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
Trace complete.

Mike Lyon

2008-07-18 17:40:43 UTC

Permalink

Think this may be an ongoing issue... Last night out here in the bay
area, myself and many other SBC/ATT users were experiencing random
blackholed networks. Total PITA!

-Mike

Post by Justin Ream
Hey we got one too - we're having problems through Level 3.
Hop IP Address Hostname ASN Network Name % Loss Min Latency Latency Avg
Latency Max Latency Std Dev
1 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.1 0 0.37 0.47 0.67 0.06
2 192.168.1.254 192.168.1.254 0 0.66 0.76 1.1 0.07
3 216.31.131.253 s1p20.colo1.lax.ca.us.tierzero.net 11509 TIERZERO-700LA 0
1.98 5.02 133.36 18.37
4 216.31.128.131 asbr2.bsap.lax1.ca.us.tierzero.net 11509 TIERZERO-700LA 0
2.24 6.88 186.29 25.73
5 4.71.142.93 ge-9-23.car2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 3356 LVLT-ORG-4-8 0 2.4
11.92 183.51 36.78
6 4.68.20.69 ae-23-79.car3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 3356 LVLT-ORG-4-8 0 2.79
7.21 70.62 14.11
7 4.68.110.114 sbc-level3-10ge.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 3356 LVLT-ORG-4-8 0
2.89 15.72 207.58 35.31
8 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 5.71 2.77
3.8 21.95 3.22
9 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 76 2.86
36.28 196.96 71.87
10 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 11.11
2.72 7.12 126.74 21.49
11 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 52 3.06
16.62 138.84 37.11
12 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 13.89
2.91 15.14 160.99 35.24
13 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 48.28
2.93 15 92.22 29.64
14 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 2.63 2.76
8.06 122.75 20.76
15 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 61.54
3.18 11.46 49.49 15.65
16 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 0 2.81
8.9 85.47 19.06
17 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 72 3 4
7.61 1.49
18 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 8.33 2.75
8.65 142.66 24.57
19 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 80 3.24
5.15 11.5 3.19
20 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 0 2.91
3.57 9.63 1.06
21 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 68 3
36.53 139.3 57.23
22 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 5.26 2.94
9.24 198.98 32.15
23 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 55.56
3.23 6.79 39.86 9.99
24 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 11.43
3.05 7.4 123.63 21.22
25 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 80 3.17
41.51 194.34 76.41
26 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 7.32 3
7.36 137.2 21.43
27 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 61.54
3.08 7.36 24.55 7.1
28 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 8.33 3.1
7.76 132.98 22.14
29 151.164.188.138 bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 68 3.44
21.86 148.94 48.03
30 151.164.191.226 ex2-p3-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net 7132 SBCIS-SIS80 23.08
3.16 7.74 84.7 17.66
-Justin

Ren Provo

2008-07-18 17:50:46 UTC

Permalink

What did your upstream transit supplier advise before you escalated this to
the global audience at NANOG?
This is the second time in 24hrs you have requested assistance here which
could have been handled via other methods.
-ren

Post by Logan Rawlins
Anyone from sbcglobal out there? i'm seeing a routing loop. Please
contact me off list thanks.
sourceip: 69.16.137.66
tracert 75.58.215.133
Tracing route to adsl-75-58-215-133.dsl.hstntx.sbcglobal.net [
75.58.215.133]
1 2 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.113.1
2 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms 69.16.137.66
3 1 ms 2 ms 2 ms e-2-21-1000m.core-04.phx2.puregig.net
[69.16.128
.110]
4 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms v303.ar1.ph.hwng.net [69.16.128.137]
5 1 ms 1 ms 2 ms ve1011.r2.ph.hwng.net [69.16.190.161]
6 11 ms 20 ms 11 ms 2-1.r1.la.hwng.net [69.16.191.37]
7 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms vl101.ar1.lax1.us.nlayer.net [69.31.127.29]
8 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms ae0-60.cr1.lax1.us.nlayer.net
[69.31.127.165]
9 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms ex1-g12-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net
[69.31.127.50]
10 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
11 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
12 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
13 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
14 14 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
15 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
16 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
17 11 ms 12 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
18 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
19 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
20 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
21 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
22 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
23 14 ms 11 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
24 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
25 11 ms 11 ms 16 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
26 14 ms 11 ms 12 ms 151.164.188.139
27 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
28 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
29 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms bb2-p14-0.scrm01.sbcglobal.net
[151.164.188.138]
30 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 151.164.188.139
Trace complete.

Aaron Glenn

2008-07-18 23:08:23 UTC

Permalink

I think that's precisely the problem, that the issue could not have
been handled "though other methods".

I think it should be clear to those posting here as a last ditch
effort that they should certainly outline the steps they've already
taken -- basically justifying their post to NANOG: "I tried X, waited
Y, got Z, and now I'm here"

I agree NANOG is not a replacement for NOCs, but what about when the
NOCs are utterly useless and the issue is global in scope?

that's definitely one of the reasons *I* think this mailing lists
exists. infact I bet if I wasn't lazy I could find something to that
effect in the charter or nanog.org site.

Given the parties involved, I'd like to think that Logan tried to go
through standard channels prior to posting. Please realize this is no
slight against nLayer, but rather, "the new AT&T" and their concept of
customer service.

SBC/ATT/whatever peering ops was always my absolute favorite to work
with back when I actually worked in a NOC. hopefully that hasn't
changed much in the past year.

Paul

m***@bt.com

2008-07-19 19:26:33 UTC

Permalink

Post by Logan Rawlins

Post by Logan Rawlins
Anyone from sbcglobal out there? i'm seeing a routing

loop. Please

Post by Logan Rawlins
contact me off list thanks.

What did your upstream transit supplier advise before you
escalated this to the global audience at NANOG?
This is the second time in 24hrs you have requested
assistance here which could have been handled via other methods.

Sounds like he's used to used IRC, not mailing lists.
There used to be an IRC channel where a lot of NANOG
folks hung out. Anyone care to publicize the channel
name and which IRC network carries it?

--Michael Dillon

Joel Jaeggli

2008-07-19 19:33:20 UTC

Permalink

Post by m***@bt.com
Sounds like he's used to used IRC, not mailing lists.
There used to be an IRC channel where a lot of NANOG
folks hung out. Anyone care to publicize the channel
name and which IRC network carries it?
--Michael Dillon

from the nanog mailing list...

From: "Tim Brown" <>
To: "Matthew McGehrin" <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: real-time DDoS help?

Post by m***@bt.com
First and foremost, the #nanog IRC channel has absolutely nothing to
do with the nanog mailing list, other than it shares some common
personalities. Operational discussion is rarely experienced, the most
often-experienced relevant question is "how do I configure BGP", and
Secondly and perhaps most notably, IRC is in no way, shape, or form a
protocol or communications method one would describe as resilient or
operationally relevant. Neither are the instant messaging networks or
Jabber servers. IRC does not meet the "needs" of operators.
Describing these needs is a separate topic and probably not
appropriate for this mailing list, even though you could describe the
topic as operationally relevant.

Andrew D Kirch

2008-07-19 19:34:39 UTC

Permalink

Post by m***@bt.com

Post by Logan Rawlins

Post by Logan Rawlins
Anyone from sbcglobal out there? i'm seeing a routing

loop. Please

Post by Logan Rawlins
contact me off list thanks.

What did your upstream transit supplier advise before you
escalated this to the global audience at NANOG?
This is the second time in 24hrs you have requested
assistance here which could have been handled via other methods.

There's a #nanog on EFNet, and a #nanog on Freenode. I'd recommend the
Freenode NANOG as EFNet is pretty well overrun with kiddies.

Andrew

Jay R. Ashworth

2008-07-24 17:46:01 UTC

Permalink

Sounds like he's used to used IRC, not mailing lists. There used to
be an IRC channel where a lot of NANOG folks hung out. Anyone care to
publicize the channel name and which IRC network carries it?

I was invited to it once, but do not have it handy now; it is
by-invite-only, and it is *not* #nanog on any network.

Cheers,
-- jra

--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink ***@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Josef Stalin)

m***@bt.com

2008-07-19 19:44:31 UTC

Permalink

Post by m***@bt.com

Post by m***@bt.com
Sounds like he's used to used IRC, not mailing lists.
There used to be an IRC channel where a lot of NANOG folks

hung out.

Post by m***@bt.com
Anyone care to publicize the channel name and which IRC network
carries it?

from the nanog mailing list...
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 12:17 PM

Post by m***@bt.com
First and foremost, the #nanog IRC channel has absolutely

nothing to > do with the nanog mailing list, other than it
shares some common > personalities.

Which IRC network? There are dozens of IRC networks and although
you can find channels with the same name on different networks,
they rarely share common personalities.

In any case, I would expect that an IRC channel would contain
mostly front-line NOC people, and except for the smaller networks
where one person wears many hats, I would not expect to find
such people hanging out on the NANOG list.

Now, perhaps #nanog is not the channel I am thinking of, in which
case I think it would be a good idea for someone with first
hand experience to post the channel or channels which do
cover this type of stuff. Same thing goes for Jabber channels
or any other IM network. Is there a place where frontline
network operators hang out, where it is not frowned upon to
ask operational questions about events in progress?

--Michael Dillon

Simon Lockhart

2008-07-19 19:50:53 UTC

Permalink

Post by m***@bt.com
Is there a place where frontline
network operators hang out, where it is not frowned upon to
ask operational questions about events in progress?

There are many. I suspect some are more public than others (but I don't have
a list, so don't bother asking!). The most useful ones tend to be "by invite
only", otherwise they just get full of people asking inane questions, and the
useful people get bored and go elsewhere.

Simon