Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 344
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by smueller
    Interestingly, we are routing a /22 of cogent's IPs over internap right now and are able to get through to level3. So Level3 must be blocking cogent's ASN and not their IPs.
    Level(3) is not blocking anything, from what I can tell, they have simply stopped their peering relationship with Cogent. Cogent can resolve the issue b purchasing the routes from somone else. Level(3) COULD do the same, but why in the world would a Tier 1 ever buy routes?? It is the Tier 2's responsibility to be able to reach all the tier 1's for the sake of their customers.
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    Posts
    348
    Karl, cogent was tracerouting to right before level3's routers for a customer. Now it does actually stop at cogent's routers. But viceversa:
    C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>tracert 66.250.216.1
    Tracing route to 66.250.216.1 (cogent IP) over a maximum of 30 hops
    1 8.10.18.1 (a level3 router) reports: Destination host unreachable.

    Trace complete.


    Level3 appears to be blocking cogent even at the access layer. You can see from level3's looking glass (http://www.level3.com/LookingGlass/) that they are not allowing cogent IPs (looks like IPs traversing cogent ASNs actually) to go past any of their routers.

    I was on the phone several hours today helping a company deal with this by routing a /22 of cogent's ips over internap. both the internap and the cogent engineers said that level3 is blocking cogent's ASN and that's why routing over other peers/transit still doesn't get through from cogent.
    NewServers Utility Hosting
    http://www.newservers.com
    Low Hourly Billing for Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #78

    L3

    I have to take L3 out for lunch.., since this came down the pipe business on new circuit orders for Savvis, AT&T,etc. has really jumped.
    sales@ipv4depot.com
    www.ipv4depot.com
    IPv4 Buying, Selling, and Leasing
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by smueller
    Karl, cogent was tracerouting to right before level3's routers for a customer. Now it does actually stop at cogent's routers. But viceversa:
    C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>tracert 66.250.216.1
    Tracing route to 66.250.216.1 (cogent IP) over a maximum of 30 hops
    1 8.10.18.1 (a level3 router) reports: Destination host unreachable.

    Trace complete.


    Level3 appears to be blocking cogent even at the access layer. You can see from level3's looking glass (http://www.level3.com/LookingGlass/) that they are not allowing cogent IPs (looks like IPs traversing cogent ASNs actually) to go past any of their routers.

    I was on the phone several hours today helping a company deal with this by routing a /22 of cogent's ips over internap. both the internap and the cogent engineers said that level3 is blocking cogent's ASN and that's why routing over other peers/transit still doesn't get through from cogent.
    Wait.. You show traces from Level(3) exactly identical to the ones we get from Cogent, with nothing really happening at all and that shows that Level(3) is blocking Cogent?

    Level(3) depeered Cogent, so yes, they will "block" direct routes from Cogent other than that I have seen no evidence of Level(3) null-routing or otherwise blocking Cogent. To me it simply appears that BGP is not detecting any valid routes between Level(3) and Cogent and so the packets are just dying, not that Level(3) is blocking anything from going through. I could be wrong, as I am not a network engineer, but that is how I understand it.
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    Posts
    348
    depeering cogent is fine. If I'm single-homed to level3 and I try to traceroute a cogent IP, it should now go out of level3, into some other network and eventually end up at cogent through one of cogent's other peers or transit providers. However, the very first level3 router a single-homed server hits says that it has no route to that host. That means level3 has null routed cogent. Doesn't mean they depeered cogent (althought they also did that).
    NewServers Utility Hosting
    http://www.newservers.com
    Low Hourly Billing for Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,914
    This whole ordeal sounds like one of those "fun for the whole family" situations /end sarcasm.

    Seriously though who is it? If both are not routing to either one couldn't that be being caused by some technical issue between them? Or has cogent also now blocked level3's ASN's?

    In any case here's to both these transit providers growing up and stopping playing bully on one another needlessly ruining their own networks fact being nobody is winning out of this one and until both sides quit being childish blocking one another this mess is probably going to just keep getting worse.

    (Above is just my view on this, I obviously reserve the right to be incorrect on some of the statements made, however observing this thread and the multiple reports and data it would seem as though both sides are in deed blocking each other's data transfer from occurring.)

    -Justin
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Houston Texas
    Posts
    4,420

    Re: L3

    Originally posted by mams482
    I have to take L3 out for lunch.., since this came down the pipe business on new circuit orders for Savvis, AT&T,etc. has really jumped.
    I am glad you are profiting from a lot of headache this has caused many of us providers...........I was thinking about telling you what I was really thinking about your post.......but decided I have more class than that.
    Dedicated Servers
    WWW.NETDEPOT.COM
    Since 2000
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Houston Texas
    Posts
    4,420
    one thing customers taht are multihomed can do is to move traffic away from level 3 and cogent to make them both pay for their actions. anything you arent required by contract to send them can be diverted quite easily and send an email telling them you are doing this so they know they are not profiting from it.
    Dedicated Servers
    WWW.NETDEPOT.COM
    Since 2000
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,584
    I am glad you are profiting from a lot of headache this has caused many of us providers...........I was thinking about telling you what I was really thinking about your post.......but decided I have more class than that.

    well put
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #85
    Originally posted by smueller
    depeering cogent is fine. If I'm single-homed to level3 and I try to traceroute a cogent IP, it should now go out of level3, into some other network and eventually end up at cogent through one of cogent's other peers or transit providers. However, the very first level3 router a single-homed server hits says that it has no route to that host. That means level3 has null routed cogent. Doesn't mean they depeered cogent (althought they also did that).

    This is not what i am seeing. From my Level 3 homed box, of which i will not disclose the traceroute for reasons that are outside of this discussion, I am seeing the traceroute go to Verio, and from there it just stops. Having talked to Level 3 techs they told me that they are not null routing cogent, but rather cogent is not announcing their routes to Verio, which basically means Verio does not know where to send the packet.

    It's all one big mess, and I wish it would be done with, as the several Cogent 10 mbit unlimited servers i have at The Planet are seeing one huge drop in traffic getting to them. The Planet has no way to resolve the issue, so I am stuck.
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    Posts
    348
    hmm... it's interesting that we're seeing very little drop in some cogent-only servers. and that is very fishy what level3 is claiming. So you're saying all verio customers can't see cogent IPs either? I doubt this. And verio ONLY has cogent and level3 as peers/upstreams? Nobody else is providing routes to them and level3 strips the cogent routes out of their tables (likely)? And level3's routers are being told by verio to pass the traffic to them even though they're not getting routes to the cogent IPs?

    Also, all level3 single-homed bandwidth we have access to (and you can check the looking glass) doesn't get past the first router when trying to get to a cogent IP routed by cogent.
    NewServers Utility Hosting
    http://www.newservers.com
    Low Hourly Billing for Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #87
    Smueller; I am just reporting what i am seeing, and have heard from the level 3 tech, who is a friend of mine. I can only speculate beyond that.
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,306
    Originally posted by X-Istence
    I am seeing the traceroute go to Verio, and from there it just stops. Having talked to Level 3 techs they told me that they are not null routing cogent, but rather cogent is not announcing their routes to Verio, which basically means Verio does not know where to send the packet.
    Cogent is definitely still connected to Verio, whether it's peering or transit I can't be certain, but we reach Cogent via Sprint->Verio->Cogent, same as before this mess I believe.

    If you have a L3 box that routes to Verio and then nothing comes back where it should be hitting Cogent, it may be that Cogent is choosing not to hear L3 routes from Verio. If Cogent buys transit from Verio, and I think they might in some if not all markets, this means they don't want to start paying Verio to carry their bits to/from L3. It may indeed be that they cannot do that at present, depending on the volume of traffic involved.

    Tier 1 and Tier 2 are somewhat arbitrary distinctions. I'm no fan of Cogent's network, but the fact remains, it takes two parties to exchange data. The two parties that are losing out are L3 customers and Cogent customers.

    Here's a good quote from the NANOG discussion:

    So Level3 is pissing off 7.5% of their own customers by failing to
    transmit their traffic to Cogent, and return traffic back to the
    customer. How does L3 justify this behavior to those customers?
    Somehow I don't think the customer is going to be too happy with an
    explanation that goes like this:

    "Even though you pay us for internet access, we want this other network
    to pay us TOO so that we get paid double for transmitting your traffic
    to and from that other network rather than doing a mutual exchange like
    we do with other big networks."
    Here's another angle - I run a transit network; our peering is strictly local (PitX). We don't buy transit from, for example, Verio. If Verio wants to reach our network, they have to peer with someone we do buy transit from (or they could buy transit from them). Verio does this because it's in their best interest to be able to reach our network - because their customers want to reach our network. They don't arbitrarily decide our network isn't "worth" reaching.

    Same idea. A network should be built to serve the customer's needs, not to satisfy arbitrary design criteria or to pull stunts like the current one under discussion.

    Kevin
      0 Not allowed!

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by smueller
    depeering cogent is fine. If I'm single-homed to level3 and I try to traceroute a cogent IP, it should now go out of level3, into some other network and eventually end up at cogent through one of cogent's other peers or transit providers. However, the very first level3 router a single-homed server hits says that it has no route to that host. That means level3 has null routed cogent. Doesn't mean they depeered cogent (althought they also did that).
    OK, it seems you are not following...

    It isn't solely up to Level(3) about getting routes to Cogent. Look at the situatio Cogent had with ATDN, it was very similar. ATDN could have routed to Cogent over one of these other transit providers, but they didn't, as it appears obvious that Cogent does not purchase full transit from anyone. They are purchasing certain routes that they cannot get otherwise from Verio. If there are no routes between Level(3) and Cogent how can Level(3) send the packets? From both sides it is showing that there are NO routes, to me this appears it is obvious that the issue is exactly this, that Cogent doesn't have any routes to Level(3) as they only purchase select routes, which in their situation generally makes sense, as why should they pay for routes they already get through peering?

    How do you suggest Level(3) route to Cogent if Cogent doesn't have a full/global transit arrangement, which appears to be the case from previous cases? Level(3) can't simply send it over say AT&T to get there, as that would be against their peering agreement with AT&T, etc..
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
      0 Not allowed!

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by X-Istence
    This is not what i am seeing. From my Level 3 homed box, of which i will not disclose the traceroute for reasons that are outside of this discussion, I am seeing the traceroute go to Verio, and from there it just stops. Having talked to Level 3 techs they told me that they are not null routing cogent, but rather cogent is not announcing their routes to Verio, which basically means Verio does not know where to send the packet.

    It's all one big mess, and I wish it would be done with, as the several Cogent 10 mbit unlimited servers i have at The Planet are seeing one huge drop in traffic getting to them. The Planet has no way to resolve the issue, so I am stuck.
    Exactly, Level(3) is NOT null-routing Cogent, Cogent is not announcing their routes through any other transit carrier to Level(3), thus there are no routes and Level(3) is forced to drop the packets. That is how it works... I have no idea where the crazy idea came from that Level(3) is null-routing Cogent...

    This could have all been prevented had Cogent had measures in place to reach Level(3) through other means. It is the Tier 2's responsibility to reach all the Tier 1's by purchasing correct routes, peering, etc., not the other way around.
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,306
    Originally posted by KarlZimmer
    Exactly, Level(3) is NOT null-routing Cogent, Cogent is not announcing their routes through any other transit carrier to Level(3), thus there are no routes and Level(3) is forced to drop the packets. That is how it works... I have no idea where the crazy idea came from that Level(3) is null-routing Cogent...
    It's entirely possible that Level(3), in addition to depeering, is filtering the routes they receive from peers to drop anything with ASN 174 in it. This would make it impossible for Cogent to buy transit from anyone to reach Level(3), except presumably Level(3). That would really be going further than anyone realizes.

    Kevin
      0 Not allowed!

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by sigma
    It's entirely possible that Level(3), in addition to depeering, is filtering the routes they receive from peers to drop anything with ASN 174 in it. This would make it impossible for Cogent to buy transit from anyone to reach Level(3), except presumably Level(3). That would really be going further than anyone realizes.

    Kevin
    That COULD be happening, but that doesn't appear to be what is happening. If that were happening we would see Cogent routes going out another provider, such as Verio, and then stopping when they would have reached L3, but that is not happening. The Cogent routes are stopping immediately, showing that there is no route, so the packets are just getting dropped.

    To me it seems like a typical depeering that Cogent is turning into a media/marketing thing instead of going through it as they should and taking care of their customers. It is almost exactly the same as what happened with ATDN...

    As I've said to anyone who has asked, I'd put 1/3 blame on Level(3) and 2/3 on Cogent. They are both at fault for it happening in the first place, but it was Cogents responsibility to assure that their customers weren't damaged by this. had they simply purchased Level(3) routes from someone else, as they were warned of this well in advance, we wouldn't have an issue now as everyone would be reaching Level(3) from Cogent via Verio and vice versa.
    Last edited by KarlZimmer; 10-05-2005 at 10:35 PM.
    Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
    VMware Virtual Data Center Platform

    karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
    Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
      0 Not allowed!

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    49
    Originally posted by porcupine
    If I'm wrong on this one, it would be a flaw/hole in my entire logic admittedly
    You've been told that more than once in the past.
      0 Not allowed!

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    49
    Originally posted by sigma
    And by no means should anyone think, IMHO, this is a good situation that has arisen, regardless of how you feel specifically about Cogent, or for that matter, Level(3).
    Some "colo experts" will always run their hands together when this sort of situation develops. Like a horse with blinkers on.
      0 Not allowed!

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,207
    I hope their stock PLUMMETS tomorrow! Dumb****s... I can't reach several web sites as of now, on RoadRunner.
      0 Not allowed!

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    Posts
    348
    Karl, you're saying that cogent announces their routes (or some of them) to verio, for example. Verio customers are able to access cogent IPs. But then tells verio, don't in turn announce these routes to level3 or possibly even don't announce these routes to anyone else, they're for your routers only? And if level3 makes it out through you towards cogent, null route these IPs?

    I'm not an expert in how peering agreements can be made, but it just makes more sense level3 is blocking cogent. Traceroutes were going over other providers from cogent earlier and then stopping before level3. That changed when cogent stopped wasting their resources in allowing routes to level3.

    What could be happening in x-istence's case is the traceroute is, in fact, going all the way to cogent. But cogent's edge routers are not returning the icmp packets (why should they?), so you guys are seeing verio and nothing after.

    Level3 techs might think they are not blocking anything, but engineers of all other major backbone/transit companies think they are. Having had to deal with this today, I've spoken to a number of them.
    NewServers Utility Hosting
    http://www.newservers.com
    Low Hourly Billing for Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    256
    Originally posted by Acroplex
    I hope their stock PLUMMETS tomorrow! Dumb****s... I can't reach several web sites as of now, on RoadRunner.
    Ya, I already gave them a hollar, they are claiming at least that they're working on routing around the problem... who knows. Fact remains I, and most likely you, can't get to anything that's on cogent right now. I don't blame cogent for this, I blame TW. There's absolutely no reason someone of their size shouldn't have multiple routes to get to Cogentco
      0 Not allowed!

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,207
    Millions of RoadRunner customers can't get to sites parked with Sedo. That's a huge revenue loss for me and others that monetize domains, if it continues. I already had a 30% revenue drop today.
      0 Not allowed!

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,083
    Originally posted by seraph1
    There's absolutely no reason someone of their size shouldn't have multiple routes to get to Cogentco
    Much like there's no reason anyone should be single-homed to Cogent. This has been coming for a long time, and if it impacted you and was a surprise to you or your co-location/hosting provider, then you need to take your business across the street. Cogent's own sales people encourage their customers to multi-home. Events like this are precisely why.

    That said, I believe Cogent's wholesale product remains valuable. While it is unlikely they will remain partitioned from Level(3) permanently, even if that were the case, their product is commodity Internet at a commodity price. This event will not impact my recommendations to clients in the slightest, nor will it cause me to hesitate for a moment to utilize Cogent transit.

    In short, as a webmaster or hosting company, you can't place blame entirely on Cogent and Level(3). End-users like the poster who can't reach Cogent from his Time-Warner cable service don't really have a lot of choice. Businesses, on the other hand, have plenty of choice and should have plenty of resources to make problems like this a non-issue.
    Jeff at Innovative Network Concepts / 212-981-0607 x8579 / AIM: jeffsw6
    Expert IP network consultation and operation at affordable rates
    95th Percentile Explained Rate-Limiting on Cisco IOS switches
      0 Not allowed!

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    464
    We lost ~4k in revenue today because of this. We have one rack on L3 and another on Cogent. Never thinking they wouldn't be able to see each other.
      0 Not allowed!

Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •