Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: mfnx
From: Scott Granados <scott () wworks net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 18:31:17 -0800 (PST)


And just to be totally fair so that mfnx isn't misrepresented or anything.

I've looked back and it doesn't seem like I got an autoresponded ticket
and while calling the voice lines I got a fast busy which after some
digging was a result of some voice issues on my carrier.  So although it
seemed to me that mfnx wasn't responding they might not have known they
had to.  I only had the toll free number, maybe a direct number would have
worked but either way once posting to nanog the responses were very very
quick and correct the first time.


and most importantly, thanks to the folks who did help.

Scott


On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:

In a message written on Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:02:24AM -0800, Scott Granados wrote:
Nope, nobody responded from noc () above net so I tried here, got a response
and was all set.  Helpful once you get around the noc where we had no
response.

This is not in response to Scott's specific problem, but since MFN
was brought up I will inform a bit about how we work.

noc@ opens a ticket.  You should get an auto reply within a couple
of minutes.  No auto-reply probably means things are broken enough
that the phone is necessary.  The phone number in the above.net,
mfnx.net, and AS 6461 records will (after a bit of IVR) get you to
someone who can help.

peering@ also opens a ticket.  The same applies.

Note, for us noc@ and peering@ go two different places.  noc@ is
realtime issues, peering@ is policy/requests and other non-realtime
issues.

--
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request () tmbg org, www.tmbg.org



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]