nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
From: jmalcolm () uraeus com
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 02:25:49 +0000
Daniel Golding writes:
They can. Cogent has transit and is preventing traffic from traversing its transit connection to reach Level(3). Level(3) does not have transit - they are in a condition of settlement free interconnection (SFI). The ball is in Cogent's court. This is not the first time or the second that they have chosen to partition.
One could also say that L3 has chosen to configure the links they have with Cogent not to pass their traffic, and has therefore caused this current situation. Both of these statements are equally true and possess approximately equal usefulness. Joe
Current thread:
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering, (continued)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Chris Stone (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Alex Rubenstein (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Jeff Shultz (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Justin M. Streiner (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Pete Templin (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Chris Stone (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Press Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering William Allen Simpson (Oct 06)
- Re: Press Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering JC Dill (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Daniel Golding (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering jmalcolm (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Randy Bush (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Dave Stewart (Oct 05)
- Cogent/Level 3 drama, why it's the best news of the day! Peter Kranz (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering David Barak (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Daniel Golding (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 05)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Richard A Steenbergen (Oct 05)