I know in the past several of us have reached out privately to folks at DCN about their port saturation, which seems to come and go.
We do not have a policy about member-port saturation, and my recollection is similar to Richard's - we didn't want to be bossy about people's peering.
Cheers,
anthony
On 8/20/19, 9:05 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager@WIKTEL.COM> wrote:
On 8/20/19 8:48 PM, Darin Steffl wrote:
> Is there any policy in place for peers that let their ports saturate at
> 100% for an extended period of time? DCN looks like they could use an
> upgrade to their 10G port and not sure if anyone proactively reaches out
> to members when saturation occurs.
I've forwarded your message to DCN.
For remote switch ports, we have a policy of requiring upgrades before
saturation.
For regular participants, I'm not sure that we have a policy.
I'm also not sure if we want a policy there, as that might be considered
dictating peering policy. I'm not personally opposed, but this is
something that would need some thought.
--
Richard
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1