Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering

[Daniel Golding <dgolding () burtongroup com>]

On 10/6/05 1:41 AM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net> wrote:

> On Oct 5, 2005, at 4:13 PM, Daniel Golding wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> 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.

> And no, L3's "SFI" status does not mean it's Cogent's fault.

There is no fault here. This is a business arrangement for all concerned.
Cogent can make a configuration change to use their transit to reach
Level(3). Level(3) has depeered them. I don't think anyone is "right" or
"wrong". Generally, when one plays the peering game and loses, one eats it.
Cogent however, is putting up a fight first. I don't blame them - its what I
would do. However, they must face the music with their customers.

> 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 Level 3 doesn't mind not being able to pass packets to Cogent,
> that's fine.  If they do mind, they need to figure out a way to solve
> the problem - with Cogent.  The inverse is true as well.  As RAS
> said, it takes two to tango.
>
>
> This problem will be solved "soon" (in human time - days, weeks at
> most).  One of the networks may go out of business, but that "solves"
> the problem because there would no longer be locations on the
> Internet someone couldn't reach.  I suspect it will be solved by less
> drastic means.

Usually these situations resolve in 2 - 10 days. At least, that's been the
pattern. My prediction is that Cogent will fold, because they have in the
past. Of course, I can't speak to Level(3)'s intestinal fortitude.


- Dan