[85105] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Wed Oct 5 12:09:57 2005
In-Reply-To: <CE9A7886-6F90-48EA-A9A6-08C216590D9B@crocker.com>
Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:03:15 -0400
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Oct 5, 2005, at 11:50 AM, Matthew Crocker wrote:
> I opened a billing/support ticket with Cogent. I'm not planning
> on paying my bill or continuing the contract if they cannot provide
> full BGP tables and full Internet transport (barring outages).
> Luckily I have 2 other providers so I can still reach Level 3.
I'm curious where in your contract you think Cogent guaranteed you
connectivity to Level 3?
Most transit contracts only guarantee packet delivery to the edge of
their own networks. I'm pretty sure Cogent is doing that. (Hell,
they have lots of spare capacity now. :)
Of course, I would claim that the word "transit" has certain
implications, but IANAL. (I'm not even an ISP. :) So perhaps
someone could enlighten me on how one would go about asking for
credits for this ... disconnectivity.
Also, I've already heard from customers of L3 single-homed providers
that L3 will _NOT_ be issuing credits. So I guess the question goes
for L3 contracts as well.
> Maybe I can buy the new 'Cogent - it is almost the Internet'
> service for less money.
Maybe. Would you pay L3 for "almost the Internet" as well?
There is nothing wrong with "partial transit". If we could get
partial transit at 50% off full transit pricing, we would absolutely
consider it - depending on things like which "part" of the Internet
is served.
And why aren't people asking for partial transit pricing from
providers who do things like filter smaller prefixes (because they
are too cheap or too dumb to run a real backbone) or entire countries
(say, for spam) or other things?
--
TTFN,
patrick