Print

---

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" <[log in to unmask]> 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