[187162] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew D. Hardeman)
Thu Jan 21 14:02:42 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Matthew D. Hardeman" <mhardeman@ipifony.com>
In-Reply-To: <201601211852.SAA05755@sunf10.rd.bbc.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:02:38 -0600
To: Brandon Butterworth <brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I hear you.
Taken to extremes, I can see how the argument sounds like that.
However=E2=80=A6 I have some thoughts on what you=E2=80=99ve said.
Most of us would never get peerings to all the Tier 1s.
But=E2=80=A6
Hurricane Electric already has IPv6 peering to every network that =
matters, save for Cogent=E2=80=99s. Every other accepted Tier 1 peers =
with HE on IPv6. Even SPRINT. If we got back historically, they =
(Sprint) were among the most coveted and hardest to get IP peerings. =
Even they recognized HE=E2=80=99s dominance of the IPv6 space early on.
I=E2=80=99m not bashing Cogent. I=E2=80=99m a customer of theirs and =
they=E2=80=99ve generally served me well. The trouble I have in =
accepting Cogent=E2=80=99s behavior in this matter is that it just seems =
irrational. If a typical, public forum peering dispute arose between HE =
& Cogent regarding IPv6, frankly and pretty objectively, you=E2=80=99d =
expect it to be Hurricane Electric questioning the value of peering =
Cogent IPv6 rather than Cogent questioning HE.
I don=E2=80=99t question these parties=E2=80=99 rights not to peer, but =
I do question the logic behind it. I think Cogent is hurting themselves =
on this more than HE is getting hurt by it.
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 12:52 PM, Brandon Butterworth =
<brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk> wrote:
>=20
>>> On Jan 21, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Matthew D. Hardeman =
<mhardeman@ipifony.com> wrote:
>>> Since Cogent is clearly the bad actor here (the burden being
>>> Cogent's to prove otherwise because HE is publicly on record as =
saying
>>> that theyd love to peer with Cogent)
>=20
> I'd like to peer with all tier 1's, they are thus all bad as
> they won't.
>=20
> HE decided they want to be transit free for v6 and set out on
> a campaign of providing free tunnels/transit/peering to establish
> this. Cogent, for all their faults, are free to not accept the
> offer.
>=20
> Can the Cogent bashing stop now, save it for when they do something
> properly bad.
>=20
> brandon
