I think the implication is that, on Cogent, there isn't. :) On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 14:00 Chuck Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Define "good" vs. "bad" transport of bits. As long as there is > adequate bandwidth and low latency, who cares? > > On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 08:30:37PM +0100, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > > That will have the effect of prioritizing Cogent routes as that would be > > more specific than the default routes from the other providers. Cogent > are > > not that good that you would want to do that. > > > > Den 2. mar. 2017 20.16 skrev "Jeff Waddell" < > [email protected] > > >: > > > > Or at least ask for a full view from Cogent - then you won't get any > routes > > they don't have > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Alarig Le Lay <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > On jeu. 2 mars 12:36:04 2017, Aaron Gould wrote: > > > > Well, I asked my (3) upstream providers to only send me a ipv6 > default > > > > route and they sent me ::/0...here's one of them... > > > > > > Why did you don’t ask for a full view? With that, you can easily deal > > > with that kind of problem. >
