North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering

  • From: Daniel Roesen
  • Date: Wed Oct 05 17:35:43 2005

On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:51:34PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> I think you and I have a different definition of "deny" and "decision".

I agree that my usage of words was highly suboptimal to express what I
wanted to express. See my other answer.

> Cogent was connected to L3.  Level 3 TOOK ACTIVE STEPS to sever that  
> relationship.  Cogent, this moment, has their routers, ports, and  
> configurations ready, willing, and able to accept and send packets to  
> and from L3.

Yes, but Cogent actively risked that that this happens, and L3 did only
took active steps to sever that DIRECT relationship, but does (AFAIK)
nothing to prevent connectivity _at_all_ (which Cogent IMHO does claim).
They just make it more costly for Cogent. Cogent doesn't want to pay
the price, so no connectivity.

OF COURSE L3 could start to buy transit... but as a real tier 1 they
are prolly in the position that they won't need to.

A real tier 1 depeering another tier 1 would be a completely different
story though. :-)

> Please explain to me why you think Cogent is the bad actor here?

I wouldn't say "bad actor". The current situation is just the result
of L3 playing out their tier 1 card, and Cogent not being a tier 1 but
not wanting to buy more transit. Given that Cogent was not yet on the
same "eye level" (no pun intended) with Level 3, I as a hypothetical
Cogent customer would blame Cogent to not having made provisions for
that case. Again, I said that from the perspective of a Cogent
customer knowing "the hierarchy" out there.

Of course, there are shades of grey between black and white.

> By your logic, Level 3 is denying customers access to Cogent because  
> they are perfectly capable of buying transit from Verio.

L3 is tier 1, Cogent is tier 2. L3 tries to make the gap larger.
Cogent doesn't want to get the L3 routes via their transit Verio.

> If so, L3 probably feels their decision to terminate the peering  
> relationship is on sound moral, ethical, and financial ground.

I'm not sure wether "moral" and "ethics" are significant factors in
such peering battles (anymore)... especially with such offer like
Cogent's to L3 customers.

Anyway, I knew it was a mistake to post right after I sent it off.
I hate peering politics (having worked for a former tier 1 and being
losely involved into peering stuff there made me a burned kid), and
I should firmly stay out of (doing and discussing) it - especially
in a language which isn't my native one. :-(

Best regards,

CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [email protected] -- [email protected] -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0