North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering

  • From: Patrick W. Gilmore
  • Date: Thu Oct 06 10:12:37 2005 
On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Daniel Golding wrote:


Cogent does purchase transit from Verio to Sprint, AOL, and other
locations (but not to Level 3).  Perhaps Dan would like to explain
why that is relevant to the discussion at hand?  Or why that puts the
"ball" in Cogent's court?
Since you demanded it - Cogent buys transit. Regardless of what their route
filters are currently set to, or what communities or arrangements they have
with Verio, its transit. They purchase bandwidth to access other networks.
Although I have not seen their transit contract, its not a stretch to say
that they can use these connections to reach L3. I realize they may claim
otherwise, but I have personal experience with them lying about their
transit arrangements. And no, not some call center rep or NOC guy, either.
Try a Cogent executive.
I think you are confused. If Cogent pays Verio to receive (for instance) only 1239 prefixes, and to propagate 174 prefixes only to 1239, then Cogent cannot "make a configuration change" to fix things. It would require a contractual change.

But even if they could, why does this put the onus only on Cogent? Cogent has just as much right to not spend money to reach L3 as L3 has to not spend money to reach Cogent.


Perhaps we are miscommunicating. I am not saying Cogent should not buy transit to reach L3. It is a business decision, not a technical argument. I am saying your idea of "Cogent buys transit, therefore the ball is in Cogent's court" is Just Plain Wrong. The "ball" is in _both_ of their "courts".


It is strange that people have to be reminded no network has the
"right" to use any other network's resources without permission.
Most people realize this in one direction.  For instance, the "tier
ones" love to point out Cogent has no "right" to peer with Level 3.
Absolutely correct.

What some people seem to forget is that Level 3 has no right to force
Cogent to buy transit to get to Level 3.
Sure. Cogent is free to offer a partial routing table and take their chances
with their customers.
If you think the inverse of the above is also true, we agree.

However, you posts have absolutely at least implied (and I would argue outright claim) that L3 should not be expected to do anything because they are in the "SFI club", and Cogent should do something because they "buy transit".

Perhaps we do agree more than I thought. Did I misunderstand your comments about SFI and balls and courts and stuff? Do you think this situation is bilateral, or does one side have more responsibility to ensure interconnectivity than the other?

--
TTFN,
patrick