nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute?
From: Jon Lewis <jlewis () lewis org>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 00:04:57 -0400 (EDT)
On Fri, 17 May 2024, William Herrin wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 9:55 AM Ben Cartwright-Cox via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:Also poking around on RIPE Atlas suggests that for a non-zero amount of networks in India the C DNS Root Server that cogent runs is inaccessible: https://atlas.ripe.net/measurements/71894623#probesI don't understand why Cogent is allowed to operate one of the root servers. Doesn't ICANN do any kind of technical background check on companies when letting the contract? For those who haven't been around long enough, this isn't Cogent's first depeering argument. Nor their second. And they're behaving unreasonably. I don't know any of the details -this time- but historically speaking Cogent is behaving badly -again- and you can take that to the bank.
Cogent has been trying to establish themselves as a "tier 1" carrier in markets outside their home turf, and Asia is one of the markets in which the established operators are doing their best to keep Cogent out.
Back when I was helping to run a global anycast CDN, Cogent was one of our transits [in US and EU POPs]. I identified a bunch of sub-optimal service to networks in Asia who were silly/cheap enough to buy transit from Cogent. Since none of the established players would peer in-market with Cogent, and since we didn't have Cogent transit in any of our Asian POPs (why would we?), anycast request traffic from those Cogent customers would cross the Pacific and land in California rather than hit a nearby POP with NTT, Tata, Singtel, etc. transits.
I suspect Cogent has either reached what they consider to be customer critical mass in Asia, or is tired of their Asian customers complaining about latency (since traffic to any other in-market non-Cogent connected network routes via the US or EU) and has decided it's time to play peering chicken to force Tata to peer with them in Asia. Why shouldn't they? The only reason Tata, NTT, etc. won't peer with Cogent in-market is because they don't want Cogent to be able to compete with them in their home market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route Blue Stream Fiber, Sr. Neteng | therefore you are _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
Current thread:
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute?, (continued)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? William Herrin (May 17)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? David Conrad via NANOG (May 19)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? John R. Levine (May 19)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? David Conrad via NANOG (May 19)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Bryan Fields (May 19)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? David Conrad via NANOG (May 19)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? David Conrad via NANOG (May 19)
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute? John Levine (May 19)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Bill Woodcock (May 17)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? David Conrad via NANOG (May 19)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Mark Tinka (May 17)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Mark Tinka (May 18)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Bill Woodcock (May 18)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Saku Ytti (May 18)
- Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute? Bill Woodcock (May 18)