nanog mailing list archives
Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts
From: "Paul Wall" <pauldotwall () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 02:35:42 -0500
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick () ianai net> wrote:
1. Neither Sprint nor Cogent have transit Both Sprint & Cogent are transit-free networks. (Notice how I carefully avoided saying "tier one"?)
How do you explain Cogent's arrangement with NTT (AS 2914)? If it's not transit, what is it? Does Akamai have peering arrangements with Cogent directly? Paul
Current thread:
- Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 02)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Paul Wall (Nov 02)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Charles Gucker (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Charles Gucker (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Nicolas Antoniello (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Jeff Aitken (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Charles Gucker (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Paul Wall (Nov 02)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Florian Weimer (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 03)
- RE: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts David Schwartz (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Florian Weimer (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 03)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 03)