nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 17:51:50 -0400
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 11:11:05PM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote:
not wanting to buy more transit. Given that Cogent was not yet on the same "eye level" (no pun intended) with Level 3, I as a hypothetical Cogent customer would blame Cogent to not having made provisions for that case. Again, I said that from the perspective of a Cogent customer knowing "the hierarchy" out there.
I think the obvious answer from Cogent, though perhaps phrased a little bit nicer, is: for the price you pay for transit, sit down, shut up, and wait for us to resolve the issue in a way that lets us keep selling you cheap transit. On Cogent's side is the fact that the vast majority (at least by traffic volume) of its customers understand that you don't get a free lunch in this world. You don't pay the price that Cogent charges for transit AND get your butt wiped during every little issue, there just isn't enough money to go around. The majority of Cogent customers are multihomed, and rely on Cogent as a "it works pretty well most of the time" solution. If a Cogent customer wants to continue paying the price that they do for transit, they will sit down and be quiet, let (3) customers (who are more high-dollar and high-touch almost across the board) do the complaining, and try to have the situation resolved in favor of (3) giving in so Cogent can continue to dump bits to them for cheap. The confusion comes when folks expect to have their cake and eat it too. You don't pay Cogent enough money for them to buy transit to L3 when L3 wants to depeer them. That is why smart people who use Cogent multihome. Anyone who doesn't understand this is not understanding the simple economic realities of the product they are buying. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
Current thread:
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering, (continued)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Charles Gucker (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Daniel Roesen (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Lewis Butler (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Charles Gucker (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Paul Vixie (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Charles Gucker (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Tom Sands (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Daniel Roesen (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Richard A Steenbergen (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Richard A Steenbergen (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering John Payne (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering sigma (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Micheal Patterson (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering John Payne (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Richard Irving (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Richard A Steenbergen (Oct 05)
- Peering vs SFI (was Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) vijay gill (Oct 05)