nanog mailing list archives
Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now
From: Crist Clark <crist.clark () globalstar com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 16:37:26 -0700
Eric Louie wrote:
Now, one really needs to wonder why the agreement could not be reached *prior* to the depeering on 10/5 It's not rocket science.
As people have pointed out repeatedly, this was surely not rocket science since it wasn't a technical problem at all. It was a business conflict. It seems clear to me what probably happened. First-round negotaitions failed 'cause Level 3 thought Cogent was bluffing (and perhaps vice versa). Level 3 called the bluff, but it wasn't a bluff, and Level 3 then blinked (or so it appears from reading between the lines of what I've seen). They both got back to negotiation, and with a better understanding of to how much pain the other willing to take to get what they want, this time they came out with an agreement. Doesn't seems mysterious. [snip]
Who are the next discontent couples?
And how do I protect myself and my customers from any problems these kinds of events cause regardless of who the next players might be? -- Crist J. Clark crist.clark () globalstar com Globalstar Communications (408) 933-4387
Current thread:
- cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Jared Mauch (Oct 28)
- RE: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Eric Louie (Oct 28)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Christopher Woodfield (Oct 28)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now JC Dill (Oct 28)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Daniel Golding (Oct 28)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now John Curran (Oct 31)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Christopher Woodfield (Oct 28)
- RE: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Eric Louie (Oct 28)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Crist Clark (Oct 28)
- Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now Daniel Golding (Oct 28)