[89371] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Honest Cogent opinions without rhetoric.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Pete Templin)
Fri Mar 10 09:37:40 2006
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:37:12 -0600
From: Pete Templin <petelists@templin.org>
To: Drew Weaver <drew.weaver@thenap.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <B9ECBF8D89E7684EB63FF250E8788B192047A8@BIGLOG.thenap.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Drew Weaver wrote:
>
> We have heard a lot of negatives about them, about their pricing
> model, about their network, about de-peering with Level 3, etc. What we
> really need is actual information.
Here's a good one about Cogent. 100BaseTX connection from us to a
Cogent Cat3550 ("A"). "A" connects to Houston core router "B".
"Normal" Cogent BGP setup: A announces a /32 on B, B announces full
table, we announce our prefixes to A and nothing to B. A and B are
(supposedly) directly connected. Our BGP session with B flapped
numerous times this morning.
Cogent NOCperson said that a flaky router in San Jose had problems, and
had to be rebooted. As a result, "you couldn't reach your B peer".
Yeah, that makes sense. Oh, and problems in Miami plus the problems in
San Jose were causing problems in Boston and New York. Sure.
YMMV, but not a confidence-inspiring answer IMO.
pt
