nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent-TATA peering dispute?
From: Joe via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 23:52:05 -0500
Perhaps Cogent is permitted to operate a root server's infrastructure as an on-going, real-time disaster scenario - demonstrating what happens to critical DNS infrastructure when there's considerable routing loss. Not much, it seems. -joe On 5/17/2024 at 5:06 PM, "William Herrin" <bill () herrin us> wrote:
I 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?
Current thread:
- Re: who runs the root, Cogent-TATA peering dispute?, (continued)
- 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)