Re: Cogent depeers ESnet

[Cameron Byrne <cb.list6 () gmail com>]

On Jun 20, 2011 9:47 AM, "Christopher Pilkington" <cjp () 0x1 net> wrote:
> On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:53 AM, Jon Lewis <jlewis () lewis org> wrote:
>
> > internet connectivity, and that much $ is at stake, you're stupid if you
don't have some redundancy.  Nothing works all the time forever.
> I can't consider Cogent even a redundant link, since I need two other
> upstreams to reach the Internet redundantly.

This is the same case I face with level3 today. I have about 5 upstream
isp's and level3 is the only one that does not have a "full ipv6  table" and
therefore sites where level3 is one of the 2 upstreams are not redundant.

I have calls into my account team, the response they gave me was laughable.
.... something about how only 0.3% of the internet uses ipv6.

Escalating .... if you can, it might be an opportune time for other level3
customers consider an escalation.

Their lack of a full table contributes to the aaaa breakage / risk. This is
not acceptable. Buying from cogent is its own reward, level3 should not be a
service risk in itself.

Cb
> -cjp