[187182] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Corbe)
Thu Jan 21 18:20:03 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Daniel Corbe <dcorbe@hammerfiber.com>
In-Reply-To: <56A127B2.6050904@garlic.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 18:19:52 -0500
To: Robert Glover <robertg@garlic.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 1:47 PM, Robert Glover <robertg@garlic.com> wrote:
>=20
> On 1/21/2016 10:40 AM, Daniel Corbe wrote:
>>> On Jan 21, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Matthew D. Hardeman =
<mhardeman@ipifony.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> 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 they=92d love to peer with Cogent), I=92m giving serious =
consideration to dropping Cogent come renewal time and utilizing NTT or =
Zayo instead.
>>>=20
>>> While that would not immediately solve the problem that if the NTT =
or Zayo link went down, single-homed Cogent customers would loose access =
to me via IPv6, I=92m actually ok with that. It at least lets ensures =
that when there is a problem, the problem affects only single-home =
Cogent clients. Thus, the problem is borne exclusively by the people =
who pay the bad actor who is causing this problem. That tends to get =
uncomfortable for the payee (i.e. Cogent).
>>>=20
>>>=20
>> Take two transit providers that aren=92t in the group of (HE, =
Cogent). Cogent is probably banking on this being the response; =
figuring that they have the financial resources to outlast HE if they=92re=
both shedding customers.
>>=20
>> If you really wanted to stick it to Cogent, take 3 transit providers: =
HE and two of any other providers besides Cogent.
>>=20
>> Cogent clearly aren=92t going to cave to their own customers asking =
them to peer with HE. Otherwise it would have happened by now.
>>=20
>> Cogent sucks for lots of reasons and this one isn=92t even in the top =
5 IMHO.
>>=20
>>=20
> Let's hear the top 5. Peering disputes are up there, but what else?
>=20
> We've had them as one of our providers going on 8 years, and we can =
only complain about the occasional peering disputes.
>=20
> -Robert
>=20
I don=92t really have 5 reasons to hate cogent but I=92ve got 3 big =
ones. If you=92ve had static transit with Cogent for 8 years at one or =
just a handful of locations, none of these will apply. But..
1) They charge per IPv4 BGP session per month
2) They constantly screw up our orders. =20
3) It then takes days for them to fix their own screw ups in their order =
system.=20
=20=