Re: The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane Electric - and how to solve it

[Tore Anderson <tore () fud no>]

William,

> Don't get me wrong. You can cure this fraud without going to extremes.
> An open peering policy doesn't require you to buy hardware for the
> other guy's convenience. Let him reimburse you or procure the hardware
> you spec out if he wants to peer. Nor do you have to extend your
> network to a location convenient for the other guy. Pick neutral
> locations where you're willing to peer and let the other guy build to
> them or pay you to build from there to him. Nor does an open peering
> policy require you to give the other guy a free ride on your
> international backbone: you can swap packets for just the regions of
> your network in which he's willing to establish a connection. But not
> ratios and traffic minimums -- those are not egalitarian, they're
> designed only to exclude the powerless.
>
> Taken in this context, the Cogent/HE IPv6 peering spat is very simple:
> Cogent is -the- bad actor. 100%.

I'm curious: How do you know that Cogent didn't offer to peer under
terms such as the ones you mention, but that those were refused by HE?

Tore