|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org X-Really-To: <nanog@nanog.org> In-Reply-To: <7243979.6896.1406126897011.JavaMail.root@benjamin.baylink.com> From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 11:24:25 -0400 To: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote: > If I were Netflix, why would I buy all my transit from Cogent[1], given > Cogent's propensity for getting into peering fights with people *already*, > even before *I* start sending them 1000:1 asymmetric outbound traffic? Did they not buy from Level 3 as well? > So why would Cogent offer Netflix a helluva deal? Because that's the business Cogent is in? Underprice everybody but the buyer gets what he gets without any real recourse if it isn't good enough. Good money as a bottom feeder as long as you don't make the mistake of selling a dollar for fifty cents. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Brandon Butterworth <brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk> wrote: > Previous events have shown Cognet only use live rounds, so why would they > not take the opportunity to get a bigger gun? Just so. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/> Can I solve your unusual networking challenges?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |