I hope that someone can help me understand this better. We often hear people talking about cogent, that it's low quality bandwidth. But what exactly is it that makes cogent worser than the bandwidth some other NOCs are providing? So cogent is a NOC with their own network. Is it more overcrowded than other networks? - why is it sometimes slower than other networks (in traceroutes)?. Also if a provider of dedicated server says that they offer pure cogent does this mean that if cogent is down all the servers will be down. If they use other NOCs than cogent (but included cogent) does that typically mean that if cogent goes down they will switch to the other NOCs so the server will not experience any, or much, downtime? - I guess I should read some articles or tutorials about the subject. I would be gratefull if someone could explain this and if someone maybe know off some articles about the subject.

Thanks
John

It is slower because their peering isn't the best, however I did hear somewhere that they are planning to add more peering points soon.

If a NOC says they offer pure Cogent, it just means that its not multi-homed (mixed with other carriers), and could mean they do not have any different backup carrier. So if Cogent has a problem with a line you wont be able to access your server.

You can't switch to other NOC's if Cogent goes down (NOC's are datacenters), however that is why you want multi-homed, bgp4 routed, and backup with your networks.

Honestly, Cogent has good uptime, just sometimes pings can get really high.

Hope that helps,
Alec

Cogent is not a tier 1 provider like some other such as Verio and Level3. This does mean the quality of bandwith is not as good as other networks that are tier one such as the ones mentioned above. Cogents peering isn't particularly great at the moment, and you could see your packets going all around the US before it actually reaches its destination due to their strange peering agreements with other networks. Their network is entirely made of mfi's local loop and williams for long transit and they do try to keep traffic on their network for as long as possible which can result in higher ping times.

If a provider says they offer pure cogent then this means all their in and out going bandwith will go through Cogent. If they say they have a backup provider and cogent then everything will go through cogent unless cogent goes down and it will be re-routed through the other provider.

If you are looking at getting a server i would suggest getting one with multihomed bandwith, from a provider such as Internap. This is far higher quality bandwith and more reliable due to the fact Internap routes your packets through various different tier 1 providers increasing reliability and speed.

In essence i would say, that cogent can be good for some things, but maybe not others. And you do get alot for your money with cogent.

Kindest Regards,
Ben

bens said it almost perfectly. cogents acquiring psi has helped their peering, but theyre not true tier 1, cogent is great in the mix like rackshack use it, but single homed is a disaster waiting to happen, and with a backup is somewhat better although not perfect.

Ok, thank you very much for sharing :)

John

How do you figure they are not Tier 1? Tier levels dont relate to quality, they relate to how the network is built... Someone with a large network, the peers, is considered a Tier 1, Tier 2, is someone who buys bandwidth from someone who doesnt, and Tier 3, is someone who buys bandwidth from a Tier 2..

Tier 1: The 800-pound gorillas. These ISPs have their own large backbones and extensive networks of fat pipes.


Tier 2: These ISPs have their own backbones, which are generally smaller than those of Tier 1 providers. Tier 2 ISPs also buy bandwidth from Tier 1 providers.


Tier 3: These are small, local shops. They buy bandwidth from Tier 2 providers. You can look in your local phone book under Internet service to find examples.


From: Selecting an ISP 101 (http://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/0222foobar.html)

phpcoder, CoGENt, not CoGNEt

Thanks Vladimir... who knows what made me spell it wrong everytime in my post ;)

Cogent is a new provider. They've only been around for a couple of years.

Their network was created by leasing a single strand of long haul fiber from Williams (WCG). They signed a deal with MFN to provider local transit through the MANs (Metropolitan Area Networks) that MFN has built out in over 30 cities.

Their plan was to offer NON-oversubscribed 100Mbps connections for $1,000 a month to companies that were in downtown area office buildings that were wired to connect to their network. Basically, to lawyers, insurance companies, and anyone else in overpriced high rise buildings that they knew would never use the connections to their full potential.

Soon after, MFN ran out of cash and filed for bankruptcy. All construction plans were halted which basically killed Cogent's plans. However, the fact that they were offering the same 100Mbps connections to resellers (ISPs) at $3,000 per month ($30 a Mbps) sparked considerable interest.

Their network was built to be economical not to handle the demand that their pricing has created. Even with the acquisition of Netrail and PSInet their peering is horrible and performance mediocre - not that PSInet was any kind of award winner. ;)

Although there is no official definition of a "Tier 1" provider, most network operators will agree that any provider that pays (directly or indirectly) to exchange traffic with other providers is *not* a Tier 1. Cogent relies on MFN (formerly Abovenet) and Sprint to carry its traffic to networks they don't have direct connections to here in the US. Cable&Wireless and Global Crossing provide Cogent with international transit since Cogent does not own nor operate any network outside of the United States.

Being on a certain "Tier" has more to do with economics not Quality of Service. Often you can get better results from a 2nd Tier provider with connections to multiple backbones than a single connection to one of the biggest.

If you were Worldcom/UUnet, Sprint, Qwest, Level(3), C&W, AT&T, etc. would you want a bargain basement provider like Cogent to have free access to the network that has cost you billions to build?

Greetings:

"We often hear people talking about cogent, that it's low quality bandwidth. But what exactly is it that makes cogent worser than the bandwidth some other NOCs are providing? "

In studies / tests done, Cogent ranked 30th out of 34 bandwidth providers in some tests, and 32nd out of 34 in other tests (compared to being in the top 10).

From what we hear and see... latency, packet loss, poor performance.

Thank you.

are those tests available somewhere? (url) :)

Originally posted by Dragoon

Although there is no official definition of a "Tier 1" provider, most network operators will agree that any provider that pays (directly or indirectly) to exchange traffic with other providers is *not* a Tier 1. Cogent relies on MFN (formerly Abovenet) and Sprint to carry its traffic to networks they don't have direct connections to here in the US. Cable&Wireless and Global Crossing provide Cogent with international transit since Cogent does not own nor operate any network outside of the United States.


They buy longhaul and what not from people, but not bandwidth. Which makes them Tier 1... They do not purchase bandwidth from anyone, its all peering.

There are lots and lots of reputable Tier 1 providers that dont use fiber they put in on their own. Verio relies heavily on Mcleod, SBC, and Level3 fiber. Sprint relies heavily on Dynegy and US Signal in our area. ATT uses alot of Mcleod and Genuity. Qwest is in bed with New Edge. Yada yada yada.

Cogent is good bw for the cost conscious customer and for customers where speed and reliablity is not great. We have Cogent connections which perform great but about every 2-3 days there are short intermittent outages. This is fine if there is a back up and if reliability is not key. One great thing about Cogent is they have changed the industry! Because of their insane pricing model, other providers have had to slash their prices. I hope they can hang in there.

Internap is a great provider as they provide a blend of many providers, however, a host who only has Internap is NOT multi-homed. If Internap goes down, they are down!

Tier 1 is not necessarily better than Tier 2 or 3 (using kongen's definitions). Internap would be a Tier 3 using this definition and it is much much better than Cogent (IMO).

IPSs consider Tier 1 a provider who owns their own network and doesn't have to purchase transit from others.

Originally posted by haxorboi

They buy longhaul and what not from people, but not bandwidth. Which makes them Tier 1... They do not purchase bandwidth from anyone, its all peering.


Incorrect. Although their PSINet acquisition certainly helped, Cogent is not a transit-free network.

Grant

Originally posted by nogi
...But what exactly is it that makes cogent worser than the bandwidth some other NOCs are providing? So cogent is a NOC with their own network...

To clarify a few commonly-accepted definitions:

A "NOC" is a Network Operations Center. Typically a big room with people sitting around making sure something network-related is working the way it's supposed to. A NOC doesn't have servers in it, you don't colocate in a NOC. It's where your friendly support technicians answer the phone and help you with your troubles.

A "datacenter" is a place where companies put servers, routers, and switches. It can also have a NOC, but doesn't have to. It can be connected to a network, but doesn't have to be.

A "network" refers to the interconnection of various network devices. For the topic of this discussion, a network refers long-haul fiber circuits interconnecting various metropolitan areas with access points in each, generally consisting of border, core, and access-layer routers.

The three things are generally related, but don't have to be. For example, Cogent operates a nationwide network with POPs in many major cities. Their engineers and technicians monitor and maintain this network from their NOC. They also have a few datacenters that they acquired from PSINet, that are connected to their network.

Grant

Originally posted by Dragoon
Cogent is a new provider. They've only been around for a couple of years.

Their network was created by leasing a single strand of long haul fiber from Williams (WCG). They signed a deal with MFN to provider local transit through the MANs (Metropolitan Area Networks) that MFN has built out in over 30 cities.

Their plan was to offer NON-oversubscribed 100Mbps connections for $1,000 a month to companies that were in downtown area office buildings that were wired to connect to their network. Basically, to lawyers, insurance companies, and anyone else in overpriced high rise buildings that they knew would never use the connections to their full potential.

Soon after, MFN ran out of cash and filed for bankruptcy. All construction plans were halted which basically killed Cogent's plans. However, the fact that they were offering the same 100Mbps connections to resellers (ISPs) at $3,000 per month ($30 a Mbps) sparked considerable interest.

Their network was built to be economical not to handle the demand that their pricing has created. Even with the acquisition of Netrail and PSInet their peering is horrible and performance mediocre - not that PSInet was any kind of award winner. ;)

Although there is no official definition of a "Tier 1" provider, most network operators will agree that any provider that pays (directly or indirectly) to exchange traffic with other providers is *not* a Tier 1. Cogent relies on MFN (formerly Abovenet) and Sprint to carry its traffic to networks they don't have direct connections to here in the US. Cable&Wireless and Global Crossing provide Cogent with international transit since Cogent does not own nor operate any network outside of the United States.

Being on a certain "Tier" has more to do with economics not Quality of Service. Often you can get better results from a 2nd Tier provider with connections to multiple backbones than a single connection to one of the biggest.

If you were Worldcom/UUnet, Sprint, Qwest, Level(3), C&W, AT&T, etc. would you want a bargain basement provider like Cogent to have free access to the network that has cost you billions to build?

Hmm.. They just lit the building I am in so I guess your information on their construction halting is a bit wrong, also when we got turned up I boldly asked who they get their fiber from, and it is not Just MFN, but MFN,WCG, and several others. 99% of their fiber is also not being used as once their backbone utilization gets to be more they will turn on more strands..

I am not sure where everyone is saying their peering is so bad, if their peering is so bad how come they where listed as #3 is number of routes carried by a tier1 provider in the americas? (this just recently released too).

I would totally agree that this was probably more then true prior to the PSI.net purchase, but I havent had any peering issues with my Cogent Line...

Originally posted by mzima
To clarify a few commonly-accepted definitions:

A "NOC" is a Network Operations Center. Typically a big room with people sitting around making sure something network-related is working the way it's supposed to. A NOC doesn't have servers in it, you don't colocate in a NOC. It's where your friendly support technicians answer the phone and help you with your troubles.

A "datacenter" is a place where companies put servers, routers, and switches. It can also have a NOC, but doesn't have to. It can be connected to a network, but doesn't have to be.

A "network" refers to the interconnection of various network devices. For the topic of this discussion, a network refers long-haul fiber circuits interconnecting various metropolitan areas with access points in each, generally consisting of border, core, and access-layer routers.

THANK YOU for clarifying!

I was ready to flip out because the term "NOC" was used so ignorantly in this thread.

Quick Question:

Anyone here have Congent Access?
I mean does anyone here is using congent right now?
In Which City, and do you have and IP for us to ping so we can check what kind of Latency Congent have?


I want to know because I am going to host some File server on Cogent's lit Colo Center, Latency is not that important for file server, but I was thinking of using parts of the bandwidth to host a CS server for me and my friends :) , so if Cogent sucks in Latency I might have to look somewhere else.

So anyone using Cogent please Let me have an IP so I can ping and see what happens, perhaps your Router IP will be enough.