Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering

2005-10-05 Thread sigma
Exactly. And this is why Cogent's statement to the public (and their customers) is an outright lie. Level 3 isn't denying Level 3's customers access to Cogent's customers and denying Cogent's customers access to Level 3 customers.. It's just that they deny Cogent settlement-free direct

Re: 209.68.1.140 (209.68.1.0 /24) blocked by bellsouth.net for SMTP

2005-09-25 Thread sigma
No, what will happen more and more is that parties who forward email will have to make a best effort to ensure that it is not spam. Meaning a policy unfiltered email does not get fowarded to external parties This was my point. Have we already come to the day where regular e-mail

Re: Cogent and Level3 Peering Issues

2002-12-18 Thread sigma
Possibly a result of this: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=threadid=96985 Kevin Anyone happen to have more information on the problems that have been happening with the peering between Cogent and Level3. Cogent gives the standard answer when you call support, but some more

Re: UUNET instability? (fwd)

2002-04-25 Thread sigma
We have seen the same thing at 10:10am Eastern time and now at 11:45am. In fact, it's ongoing but we've not received any official explanation. And as always, www.noc.uu.net reports 'all is well'. Kevin Anyone else seeing routing instability through UUNET or have any more details? I saw a