nanog mailing list archives
RE: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
From: "David Schwartz" <davids () webmaster com>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:01:09 -0700
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 19:27:24 PDT, David Schwartz said:
Level 3 cut of Cogent's connectivity. Until and unless they give some reason that makes sense, they are no longer making the effort and are not part of the internet.
If I had a garden, things would grow *so* wonderfully next year if I spread this stuff on it.
So are you saying that if *your* AS was peered at a dozen places, and you dropped *one* because it wasn't cost-effective, that you wouldn't be part of the Internet, even though you still had 11 peers going full blast?
Being part of the Internet is not about communicating with 11 people and not the twelfth. It's about communicating with *anyone* (quite literally) that's willing to make a sufficient effort to communicate with you using the standards and practices that have evolved.
By the same logic, Cogent isn't part of the Internet *EITHER*, because they're not bending over backwards to buy transit to get the L3 routes accessible again.
Bending over backwards was never required. As I said in the part you cut off when you replied, nobody has to run a line all the way to the server in my basement that isn't connectected to anything at all. What they do have to do is make a reasonable effort to communicate with anyone who is willing to make a similar effort. When you contract for Internet access, you are contracting to reach everyone who wants to reach you. This "want" is not a mental thing, it's an action of making the effort to connect to people.
For that matter, AS1312 isn't part of the Internet either, because we're only connected at 2 major points at the moment, and we're not making much of an effort to get connectivity to places that for one reason or another don't see a routing announcement for us, or we don't see their announcement. And I'm sure that with 180K routes, there's gotta be at least a dozen that we can't actually talk to...
If they make an effort to talk to you, and you do not make a similar effort to talk to them, then you're not part of the Internet. The Internet is the network that has resulted from this philosophy. It is this philosophy that makes it the Internet.
But oddly enough, I *seem* to be on the Internet. What's wrong with this picture?
What's wrong is that you are misrepresenting yourself and your connection philosophy. You are, through your providers and peers making that effort. Buying Internet access from someone who purports to provide it is one way of trying to connect with anyone who tries to connect with you. DS
Current thread:
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering, (continued)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Paul Vixie (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Paul Vixie (Oct 08)
- OT: Connection restored between feuding Net providers Cogent/L3 Henry Linneweh (Oct 09)
- Re: OT: Connection restored between feuding Net providers Cogent/L3 Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 09)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 09)
- How to multihome endusers [was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering] Peter Dambier (Oct 09)
- Re: How to multihome endusers [was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering] william(at)elan.net (Oct 09)
- Re: How to multihome endusers [was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering] Christopher L. Morrow (Oct 09)
- RE: Cogent/Level 3 depeering David Schwartz (Oct 06)
- Contracts (was: Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) Deepak Jain (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Daniel Senie (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering James Spenceley (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Richard A Steenbergen (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Daniel Roesen (Oct 05)
- 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)