Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
Level3 leaves out little details like... 1> Of course Cogent won't notify their customers, while still in negotiation, it would cause the loss of customers, possibly for no reason, if an agreement was made. 2> Level3 does not disclose any information why they feel Cogent was getting a free ride on Level3 in stead of vice versa. Level3 claims they have a cost to take the data. But they leave out Cogent is a long haul carrier of data, and the majority of my traceroutes stay on the Cogent network for much longer distances for top performance and low latency. This is because Cogent has lots of free unused bandwidth, and has no reason to offload it to Level3, except when it is time to reach the Level3 customers. I can't prove who was abusing peering. But Jsut because Level3 make a claim of what was and wasn't fair doesn't make that perception true. Its also possible that Level3 over values its network and under values Cogent's value. The truth is Level3 doesn't have as much capacity as Cogent or as good a performing network, so it hurts Level3 to give access to its network. Cogent often takes the bum rap, because they are the low ball in town, but that doesn't make them an abuser. I'm just saying, no prove has been provided that Cogent was abusing its peering relationship. Cogent has little motive to need to. Theres an easy way to inforce someone abusing a peering arangement. Its called bandwdith management. Its called hard setting the amount of traffic that can go in each direction. To equalize a peering agreement, doesn't require a party to cancel a peering agreement. The fact is they don't like comnpanies like Cogent that lowers the value of bandwidth, and gives consumers good deals, and makes it harder for Level3 to charge a premium. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Frank Muto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 7:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/123 - Release Date: 10/6/2005 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
Level3 did it to themselves, Cogent customers didn't have the option to hear Level 3's side of the story because LEVEL3 blocked us access from reading their side, like idiots. They instead could have did port redirection to pass our traffic to their web site our something. Regardless of what anyone says, LEVEL3 could have handled this situation by simply cutting off the pipe that was used for peering, but that is not what they did. They weren't accepting route advertisements for Cogent IPs. We could send data through diverse paths (other peers / ISPs), the packets just never came back. LEVEL3 didn't block peering pipes, they blocked routing info, in other words Cogent users. Cogent wasn't technically capable to re-route our data becaue LEvel3's actions. People leave out those little details of relavence, because they can't prove it legally. But it is what happened. In my mind Level3 stinks bad in this battle, because how they fought dirty. It had nothing to do with who was actually at faught regarding whether Cogent should have free peering or not. However, Level3 atleast did the honorable thing and will be restoring service long enough for us to take action to add peers. But in my mind they should have made that decission two days ago, before all the damage was done to innocent providers and businesses such as MINE. We can sit behind the scenes as individuals educated on the matter, and point fingers at LEvel3 or Cogent. But in my customer's eyes the ONLY one responsible is ME. I got a black eye on this, that will stay for some time, and I blaim Level3. There actions were heartless on who it would effect. In my mind, Level3 was inches away from serious law sutes. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Frank Muto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 7:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/123 - Release Date: 10/6/2005 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
With all that being said, Cogent's routes pretty much suck in comparison to the other tier-1s. Being multi-homed certainly gives you a better performing network. Additionally, you might look into peering at an exchange. We are connected to the Atlanta Internet Exchange allowing us to peer with many companies for free. -Matt Tom DeReggi wrote: Only thing... A big company has a lot more leverage to control fair play with IPs than you as a small provider. When you own your own block, its real easy for a competitor (large monopoly) to block your IPs without hesitation. Much more thought goes into wether they will block IPs by a large power like Cogent. So there are disadvantages as well as benefits of owning your own IPs. The same applies to peering. Do you think any of us small ISPs will have any leverage at all to negotiate fair peering? Large companies like Cogent have the leverage to be able to negotiate peers with other large palyers like Level3. Level3 didn't restore connections just to be a nice guy to the end users. They did it because they were loosing business fast as well. Because Cogent was large enough to have that impact. I'm now going to be doing BGP and Multi-homing because this insodent, and for a PR perspective, I look more responsive to my customer because of it. But the reality is, I'm not sure it puts us up with that much of an advantage. The day, a LEVEL3 wants to block your traffic, you won't have the leverage to get them to re-open it. What cogent did was to get us better rates. Cogent pays, indirectly we pay. I support Cogents stance. I do not support however that they did not give us notice to prepair for the situation. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 8:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News I hope everyone takes this opportunity to become multi-homed if you are not already. In our case, we were already multi-homed, but all of our IPs were allocated by Cogent simply because it was the cheapest place to get them. During this mesh we learn that our IPs were in some cases being null routed. As such, we have started the process of ordering our own IP block from ARIN and have asked Cogent to assign our existing IPs to us. -Matt Frank Muto wrote: Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/123 - Release Date: 10/6/2005 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
Only thing... A big company has a lot more leverage to control fair play with IPs than you as a small provider. When you own your own block, its real easy for a competitor (large monopoly) to block your IPs without hesitation. Much more thought goes into wether they will block IPs by a large power like Cogent. So there are disadvantages as well as benefits of owning your own IPs. The same applies to peering. Do you think any of us small ISPs will have any leverage at all to negotiate fair peering? Large companies like Cogent have the leverage to be able to negotiate peers with other large palyers like Level3. Level3 didn't restore connections just to be a nice guy to the end users. They did it because they were loosing business fast as well. Because Cogent was large enough to have that impact. I'm now going to be doing BGP and Multi-homing because this insodent, and for a PR perspective, I look more responsive to my customer because of it. But the reality is, I'm not sure it puts us up with that much of an advantage. The day, a LEVEL3 wants to block your traffic, you won't have the leverage to get them to re-open it. What cogent did was to get us better rates. Cogent pays, indirectly we pay. I support Cogents stance. I do not support however that they did not give us notice to prepair for the situation. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 8:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News I hope everyone takes this opportunity to become multi-homed if you are not already. In our case, we were already multi-homed, but all of our IPs were allocated by Cogent simply because it was the cheapest place to get them. During this mesh we learn that our IPs were in some cases being null routed. As such, we have started the process of ordering our own IP block from ARIN and have asked Cogent to assign our existing IPs to us. -Matt Frank Muto wrote: Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/123 - Release Date: 10/6/2005 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
Here in ohio we got nailed by this. Verizon, SBC, Time Warner, just to name a few. I think Im going to get a backup DSL through Sprint since they were not affected by this here in ohio. Bo Matt Liotta wrote: I hope everyone takes this opportunity to become multi-homed if you are not already. In our case, we were already multi-homed, but all of our IPs were allocated by Cogent simply because it was the cheapest place to get them. During this mesh we learn that our IPs were in some cases being null routed. As such, we have started the process of ordering our own IP block from ARIN and have asked Cogent to assign our existing IPs to us. -Matt Frank Muto wrote: Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
I hope everyone takes this opportunity to become multi-homed if you are not already. In our case, we were already multi-homed, but all of our IPs were allocated by Cogent simply because it was the cheapest place to get them. During this mesh we learn that our IPs were in some cases being null routed. As such, we have started the process of ordering our own IP block from ARIN and have asked Cogent to assign our existing IPs to us. -Matt Frank Muto wrote: Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3 Current News
Level 3 Issues Ultimatum Restores connectivity to Cogent until Nov 9 Posted 2005-10-07 19:15:54 After restoring connectivity to Cogent this afternoon, Level 3 has now issued a press release (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/68244) explaining their side of the story (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17). "Despite more than 75 days of advance written notice of the termination of our agreement, Cogent apparently failed to notify its customers or make any business plans to prepare for disconnection," notes Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3 Communications. The restored peering arrangement won't last if Cogent isn't willing to negotiate, however. "Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange." Frank Muto Co-founder - Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
Hi George, Is this what you are referring to? http://www.verio.com/about/newsroom/pr/index.cfm?fuseaction=press&Year=04&id=249751102013222 Cogent and Verio do have business relationships and that is probably one of the reasons why they chose to use them as a transit provider. I don't think that it has much to do with the current SFI fiasco though. Best, Tony On 10/6/2005 7:13 PM, George created: > Cogent recently bought or took over some of Verrio's business, maybe > this has to do with that? > George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
Cogent recently bought or took over some of Verrio's business, maybe this has to do with that? George Tony Weasler wrote: To set the record straight, no peering agreements were violated between L3 and Cogent. There is also no confirmed evidence that L3 is blocking Cogent traffic through Cogent's Verio transit (which Cogent pays $$ for.) It appears that Cogent is unwilling to use this route because it would force them to pay (Verio) per Mb/s for the information sent to/from L3's network. The de-peering was consistent with the peering agreement between L3 and Cogent according to http://status.cogentco.com/ Current NANOG consensus (whatever that's worth) is that both companies are equally responsible for correcting their reachability issues, but L3 initiated the de-peering process. Peering (or Settlement Free Interconnection, SFI) is an extremely complicated subject often involving millions of dollars to the carriers involved. The current NANOG thread on the subject contains a great deal of information (and mis-information) and is a good read for those interested in the subject. I tend to weight the arguments made by Patrick, Leo, Randy, Vijay, and Richard higher than most others. Best, Tony On 10/6/2005 11:16 AM, Tom DeReggi created: For those that are not aware, Level-3 vilolated its inplace agreements, and blocked all peering connections from Cogent communications yesterday (October 5th), and rumor has it that they are also now blocking all Cogent assigned IP ranges, so that routing diverse paths won't be effective. Not much I can say about peering disputes, but blocking IPs without cause (meaning violation of AUP) is crossing the line, and clearly anti-competitive and a law sute soon to happen. Level3 VOIP provider just lost our business over this one. Can't risk using a provider that demonstrates such practices. If using Level3 for servers, call to complain, because otherwise you are going to have lots of unsatisfied customers that can't get to the servers that reside on the Cogent network. Level 3 is doing the blocking. For those of you using Level3 and looking to become multi-homed, nows the chance to save. Cogent is offering FREE one years transit service at the same capacity as the level 3 connection. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
On 10/6/2005 1:03 PM, Tom DeReggi created: >> To set the record straight, no peering agreements were violated >> between L3 and Cogent. > > I heard otherwise, however I can't prove that. Cogent on their own web site said that agreements were not violated: "Level 3 terminated its peering with Cogent without cause (as permitted under its peering agreement with Cogent) even though both Cogent and Level 3 remained in full compliance with the previously existing interconnection agreement." http://status.cogentco.com/ >> There is also no confirmed evidence that L3 is >> blocking Cogent traffic through Cogent's Verio transit (which Cogent >> pays $$ for.) > > There was evidence. I wish I saved my traceroutes yesterday. > To make more clear, Cogent is our backbone. > When going to www.logmein.com, the last successfull hop was a peer > labelled similar to verio.cogentco.com, meaning we crossed over to > Verio's side. (the actual name was more meaningful). Now today, the > traffic destined for that site stops cold at the first hop from our > network, meaning it does not get routes from Level3 on where to send the > data, once we enter Cogent's network. Unless you are referring that > Cogent is blocking any advertised route info from Level3, which is > highly unlikely. If Level3 was allowing our IPs to go through Verio's > link, we would receive routes to route our packets in that direction > across Cogent's network, and packets would travel further into Cogent's > network (such as to the Verio link). If Cogent blocked traffic to Verio, > it would most likely block it at the peer, not at the entry to Cogent's > network from us as their client. This isn't evidence of blocking on L3's side. It could be because Cogent only purchases transit to certain prefixes and L3 isn't one of them (and Verio is filtering the announcements.) It could be because Cogent internally uses traffic engineering to prevent L3 traffic from reaching them over their Verio transit circuits. One of the two scenarios is likely given their peering arrangement with L3. I didn't see any table entries on the L3 San Diego looking glass for AS174. I saw only one route on their Denver looking glass through AS7018. Does that mean that L3 is filtering or that Cogent's announcements aren't reaching L3 for other reasons? The former is probably correct, but that's not something that can be easily demonstrated. I couldn't find a looking glass in AS174 which would allow me to see Cogent's tables from the inside. Cogent does appear to be announcing their Verio link to other peers, however. I see direct announcements for AS174 and an announcement for Sprint->Verio->Cogent, but not an AT&T->Cogent path. I think that both carriers are at fault. Both companies should have resolved this before it came to reducing connectivity for their customers. They both should be held accountable by their customers. I replied to your original post, Tom, because Cogent made a public statement which directly contradicted yours and I thought that people on the list should have a more complete story [1]. You could be entirely correct about there having been a contract violation. I am confident that a considerable amount of money will be wasted trying to determine that. I fear that because of the the popularity of this issue it will reach the ears of the less clueful xEOs at carrier organizations and that the current SFI structure could be at risk of being 're-evaluated' in favor of paid interconnection. Most of the scenarios that I can think of involving compensation for interconnection lead to higher wholesale prices of bandwidth and additional overall system complexity. >> It appears that Cogent is unwilling to use this route >> because it would force them to pay (Verio) per Mb/s for the >> information sent to/from L3's network. The de-peering was consistent >> with the peering agreement between L3 and Cogent according to >> http://status.cogentco.com/ > > It stated that, but it is not in actuallity. So why would Cogent lie about something that makes them look bad on their own public web site? Many SFI contracts allow for termination without cause given enough notice and it is reasonable to assume that this one included that type of language. According to conjecture on NANOG, Cogent was given notice >40 days before the disconnect. In the absence of more reliable information I don't have any reason to assume otherwise. >> Current NANOG consensus (whatever that's worth) is that both companies >> are equally responsible for correcting their reachability issues, but >> L3 initiated the de-peering process. > > Agreed. UNLESS Level3 is actually blocking IPs that were assigned via > Cogent apposed to just blocking routes or connections. Unfortuneately I > am not in a possition to prove wether our IPs are blocked because we are > still single homed with Cogent. Cogent has so many peers that could > transmit our data via alternate paths, and the amount of
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
To set the record straight, no peering agreements were violated between L3 and Cogent. I heard otherwise, however I can't prove that. >There is also no confirmed evidence that L3 is blocking Cogent traffic through Cogent's Verio transit (which Cogent pays $$ for.) There was evidence. I wish I saved my traceroutes yesterday. To make more clear, Cogent is our backbone. When going to www.logmein.com, the last successfull hop was a peer labelled similar to verio.cogentco.com, meaning we crossed over to Verio's side. (the actual name was more meaningful). Now today, the traffic destined for that site stops cold at the first hop from our network, meaning it does not get routes from Level3 on where to send the data, once we enter Cogent's network. Unless you are referring that Cogent is blocking any advertised route info from Level3, which is highly unlikely. If Level3 was allowing our IPs to go through Verio's link, we would receive routes to route our packets in that direction across Cogent's network, and packets would travel further into Cogent's network (such as to the Verio link). If Cogent blocked traffic to Verio, it would most likely block it at the peer, not at the entry to Cogent's network from us as their client. It appears that Cogent is unwilling to use this route because it would force them to pay (Verio) per Mb/s for the information sent to/from L3's network. The de-peering was consistent with the peering agreement between L3 and Cogent according to http://status.cogentco.com/ It stated that, but it is not in actuallity. Current NANOG consensus (whatever that's worth) is that both companies are equally responsible for correcting their reachability issues, but L3 initiated the de-peering process. Agreed. UNLESS Level3 is actually blocking IPs that were assigned via Cogent apposed to just blocking routes or connections. Unfortuneately I am not in a possition to prove wether our IPs are blocked because we are still single homed with Cogent. Cogent has so many peers that could transmit our data via alternate paths, and the amount of traffic on our network going to level 3 is so little, that Cogent would be making a poor financial decission not to route our traffic an alternate path based on risking that we would switch to a redundant link to Level3. Its not to Cogent's benefit to not route our traffic financial, so it is only logical that it is Level3 blocking our IPs. I was also told Level3 was blocking our IPs, which is why our IPs could not be re-routed. Sure I can't prove this, but its not looking good for level-3. Peering (or Settlement Free Interconnection, SFI) is an extremely complicated subject often involving millions of dollars to the carriers involved. The current NANOG thread on the subject contains a great deal of information (and mis-information) and is a good read for those interested in the subject. I tend to weight the arguments made by Patrick, Leo, Randy, Vijay, and Richard higher than most others. Best, Tony On 10/6/2005 11:16 AM, Tom DeReggi created: For those that are not aware, Level-3 vilolated its inplace agreements, and blocked all peering connections from Cogent communications yesterday (October 5th), and rumor has it that they are also now blocking all Cogent assigned IP ranges, so that routing diverse paths won't be effective. Not much I can say about peering disputes, but blocking IPs without cause (meaning violation of AUP) is crossing the line, and clearly anti-competitive and a law sute soon to happen. Level3 VOIP provider just lost our business over this one. Can't risk using a provider that demonstrates such practices. If using Level3 for servers, call to complain, because otherwise you are going to have lots of unsatisfied customers that can't get to the servers that reside on the Cogent network. Level 3 is doing the blocking. For those of you using Level3 and looking to become multi-homed, nows the chance to save. Cogent is offering FREE one years transit service at the same capacity as the level 3 connection. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.11/121 - Release Date: 10/6/2005 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
Here you go: http://ct.zdnet.com.com/clicks?c=530414-23845546&brand=zdnet&ds=5&fs=0 George wrote: Hi Tom Do you have a url for this news? Thanks George Tom DeReggi wrote: For those that are not aware, Level-3 vilolated its inplace agreements, and blocked all peering connections from Cogent communications yesterday (October 5th), and rumor has it that they are also now blocking all Cogent assigned IP ranges, so that routing diverse paths won't be effective. Not much I can say about peering disputes, but blocking IPs without cause (meaning violation of AUP) is crossing the line, and clearly anti-competitive and a law sute soon to happen. Level3 VOIP provider just lost our business over this one. Can't risk using a provider that demonstrates such practices. If using Level3 for servers, call to complain, because otherwise you are going to have lots of unsatisfied customers that can't get to the servers that reside on the Cogent network. Level 3 is doing the blocking. For those of you using Level3 and looking to become multi-homed, nows the chance to save. Cogent is offering FREE one years transit service at the same capacity as the level 3 connection. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
To set the record straight, no peering agreements were violated between L3 and Cogent. There is also no confirmed evidence that L3 is blocking Cogent traffic through Cogent's Verio transit (which Cogent pays $$ for.) It appears that Cogent is unwilling to use this route because it would force them to pay (Verio) per Mb/s for the information sent to/from L3's network. The de-peering was consistent with the peering agreement between L3 and Cogent according to http://status.cogentco.com/ Current NANOG consensus (whatever that's worth) is that both companies are equally responsible for correcting their reachability issues, but L3 initiated the de-peering process. Peering (or Settlement Free Interconnection, SFI) is an extremely complicated subject often involving millions of dollars to the carriers involved. The current NANOG thread on the subject contains a great deal of information (and mis-information) and is a good read for those interested in the subject. I tend to weight the arguments made by Patrick, Leo, Randy, Vijay, and Richard higher than most others. Best, Tony On 10/6/2005 11:16 AM, Tom DeReggi created: > For those that are not aware, Level-3 vilolated its inplace agreements, > and blocked all peering connections from Cogent communications yesterday > (October 5th), and rumor has it that they are also now blocking all > Cogent assigned IP ranges, so that routing diverse paths won't be > effective. Not much I can say about peering disputes, but blocking IPs > without cause (meaning violation of AUP) is crossing the line, and > clearly anti-competitive and a law sute soon to happen. > > Level3 VOIP provider just lost our business over this one. Can't risk > using a provider that demonstrates such practices. > > If using Level3 for servers, call to complain, because otherwise you are > going to have lots of unsatisfied customers that can't get to the > servers that reside on the Cogent network. Level 3 is doing the blocking. > > For those of you using Level3 and looking to become multi-homed, nows > the chance to save. Cogent is offering FREE one years transit service > at the same capacity as the level 3 connection. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Cogent - Level3
Hi Tom Do you have a url for this news? Thanks George Tom DeReggi wrote: For those that are not aware, Level-3 vilolated its inplace agreements, and blocked all peering connections from Cogent communications yesterday (October 5th), and rumor has it that they are also now blocking all Cogent assigned IP ranges, so that routing diverse paths won't be effective. Not much I can say about peering disputes, but blocking IPs without cause (meaning violation of AUP) is crossing the line, and clearly anti-competitive and a law sute soon to happen. Level3 VOIP provider just lost our business over this one. Can't risk using a provider that demonstrates such practices. If using Level3 for servers, call to complain, because otherwise you are going to have lots of unsatisfied customers that can't get to the servers that reside on the Cogent network. Level 3 is doing the blocking. For those of you using Level3 and looking to become multi-homed, nows the chance to save. Cogent is offering FREE one years transit service at the same capacity as the level 3 connection. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
