nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:08:01 -0400
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:41:50PM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Matthew Crocker wrote:I'm curious where in your contract you think Cogent guaranteed you connectivity to Level 3?My original contract was with NTT/Verio which Cogent purchased last year when Verio nuked their Boston POP. I'm having the contract dug out of the archives to look at what it says. IMHO I pay Cogent for Transit to the whole Internet, If I wanted partial transit or local peering I would order/contract and pay for that. Cogent is not currently providing me full transit service. I really don't care who pulled the plug, it is Cogents job to fix it for me as I am their customer."Isn't BGP supposed to work around this sort of thing?" This comes down to a little more than just "depeering" -- at least in the BGP sense. There's active route filtering going on as well if connectivity is dead; after all, I can bet the house that at least one of Cogent's network edge peers has connectivity to Level3, and vice versa.
No there really isn't.
So perhaps the question you should be asking is: Why didn't routes for these networks fall over to the other upstream peers which *are* capable of moving the packets? Surely MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and others would carry the packets to the right place. I can see the paths right here....
Cogent does not buy transit from MCI, AT&T, or Sprint. Level 3 does not buy transit from MCI, AT&T, or Sprint. You can only be a "tier 1" and maintain global reachability if you peer with every other tier 1. Level 3 is obviously the real thing, and Cogent is "close enough" (at least in their own minds :P) that they won't buy real transit, only spot routes for the few things that they are missing (ATDN and Sprint basically). There is no route "filtering" going on, only the lack of full propagation due to transit purchasing decisions, or in this case the lack thereof. -- 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:
- OT: Connection restored between feuding Net providers Cogent/L3, (continued)
- 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)
- 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)