North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: Level 3's side of the story

  • From: Richard A Steenbergen
  • Date: Sat Oct 08 01:25:48 2005

On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 12:45:32AM -0400, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, David Hubbard wrote:
> >>I don't remember seeing this public notice from Level(3) posted....
> >>Wouldn't that be "without notice from Level(3)"?
> >
> >They notified Cogent, not the public.  Cogent chose to
> I think it's also interesting, that AFAIK, Level3 didn't give their own 
> customers any advance notice.  We're a customer.  I saw nothing about this 
> until it hit nanog.  We're multi homed, so the impact on us was unnoticed.

I don't know how you missed it, but as far as I can tell every sales rep 
(3) has was mobilized to call every customer or potential customer they 
have ever spoken to during the month of Augusst, informing them about the 
receipt of a depeering notice from Level 3 and offering affected customers 
zero-commit Cogent ports.

Among the people I know who took that offer, Cogent actually worked 
quickly (quicker than normal I would say) to get service up before the 
event. There was also a post to NANOG about the depeering in early 
September. While Cogent may not have taken out a full page ad in the New 
York Times for it, they certainly made every effort to inform those who 
needed to know, and they were never ambiguous about the fact that they 
were fully expecting to be segmented from (3).

Richard A Steenbergen <[email protected]>
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)