nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth
From: Peter Kristolaitis <alter3d () alter3d ca>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 19:00:27 -0400
I use Cogent as one of our upstreams at work, and I'll basically reiterate what others have said -- overall, I'd have no problems recommending them. Their routing can sometimes be a little weird (though this is MUCH better now than it was a couple of years ago), so I wouldn't necessarily use them as my main provider for latency-sensitive applications, but this isn't normally a problem with 'general' traffic. The A peer/B peer stuff they used to do was definitely weird, but they migrated us away from that configuration a few months ago (peering with them out of TorIX). Presumably they're doing that across the rest of their network. Their support has been fantastic in my experience..
I'd have to say they're probably the least painful provider I've dealt with overall (unlike some providers *cough*Telus*cough* who I've been waiting 7 weeks for to set up a freaking BGP session...). I'd have no problems picking Cogent as a provider, though of course as one of many providers for redundancy (which would be no different than any other single provider).
- Pete On 5/14/2012 6:33 PM, Michael J McCafferty wrote:
Jason, I agree with John. You can't use them as your only provider, but you wouldn't do that with *any* provider. I will add that they answer the phone quickly, and the person who answers usually has a clue, has access to the routers, and can be helpful. It's one of the benefits that they really only sell one product. Honestly, I think their support is better than most and the deliver what they say or better. In the past the had a A peer / B peer setup that was a little funky, but I think they are getting rid of that as they upgrade hardware throughout their network. We do also use Level3 (and others). As long as they come in to your facility on different fiber or otherwise meet you physical diversity requirements, you should be pretty happy. Add low commits to other providers for more diversity as needed. Good luck, Mike On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 15:12 -0700, John T. Yocum wrote:In my experience Cogent is fine when used in a BGP mix. When we used them, our service was quite reliable. Routing was funky at times, but we never had packet loss. --John On 5/14/2012 3:03 PM, Jason Baugher wrote:The emails on the Outages list reminded me to ask this question... I've done some searching and haven't been able to find much in the last 3 years as to their reliability and suitability as an upstream provider. For a regional ISP looking for GigE ports in the Chicago/St. Louis area, is Cogent a reasonable solution? Our gut feeling is that they don't stack up against a Level3 or Sprint, but they are being very aggressive with pricing to try and get our business. Thanks, Jason
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Current thread:
- Cogent for ISP bandwidth Jason Baugher (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth John T. Yocum (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Michael J McCafferty (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Paul WALL (May 14)
- RE: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Scott Berkman (May 15)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Jimmy Hess (May 15)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Peter Kristolaitis (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Joe Maimon (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Michael J McCafferty (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth John T. Yocum (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Justin Wilson (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Jay Ashworth (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Jason Baugher (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Matthew Palmer (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Jason Baugher (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Ameen Pishdadi (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Faisal Imtiaz (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Ameen Pishdadi (May 14)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Faisal Imtiaz (May 15)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Jason Baugher (May 15)
- Re: Cogent for ISP bandwidth Faisal Imtiaz (May 14)