North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering

  • From: Justin M. Streiner
  • Date: Wed Oct 05 16:34:19 2005

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Jeff Shultz wrote:

Matthew Crocker wrote:

While I realize that the "nuke survivable" thing is probably an old wives tale, it seems ridiculous that "the Internet" can't adjust by routing any packets that used to go directly from Cogent to Level 3 though some 3rd (and) 4th (and) 5th set of providers that are connected in some fashion to both...
If agreements are in place with those other providers to carry the traffic, then sure.

Remember that when backbones peer with each other, they typically (and as normally dictated by peering policies on both sides) only announce their own routes and the routes of their downstream customers and agree not to announce a default route to each other. They do not announce a full routing table to each other. Upshot: When provider X de-peers provider Y, single-homed customers of either provider will likely have problems reaching single-homed sites of the other.

Some of it comes down to the mob-rule mentality. The hope (though not often publicized :-) ) is that the de-peerER will force the de-peerEE into buying transit from them to get the de-peerEE's customers to stop calling in saying "I can't get to site BLAH - FIX THIS!" The de-peerEE (or their customers) may opt to try their case in the court of public opinion and try to get the de-peerER to reverse their stance and stop being 'the bad guy' :-)

Irresistable force, immovable object. I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.