Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 411121314
Results 326 to 344 of 344
  1. #326
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Posts
    367
    Update (4:20pm edt): Level 3 has restored all peers with Cogent as of 4:00pm edt. We are seeing some latency in traffic across to Level 3 as sessions re-establish, mail servers deliver messages, etc. We hope the above normal traffic volumes will decrease within the next hour.
    SPEAKservers, LLC - Premium Hosting Solutions
    Dedicated & Virtual Servers - Colocation - Transport/DIA - VoIP
    sales@speakservers.com / scott@speakservers.com
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #327
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    Posts
    348
    Excellent points myles. for point 5, hot potato is not that common with other tier 1 peers? Or you're thinking mci might be scared by the level3 bully into eating the cost of not doing hot potato anymore? If mci is not doing hot potato, are their in/out balances important anymore?

    point 6, although level3 would have the same routing issues because of potential cogent routing problems, mci would be more directly responsible for fixing them. Didn't know cogent had this issue, but makes sense for level3 not enjoying the peering relationship with cogent if level3 has to use up more of their technical resources researching and dealing with customers because of cogent problems.

    Politically, you've shed some light on level3's motivations.
    NewServers Utility Hosting
    http://www.newservers.com
    Low Hourly Billing for Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #328
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Gilroy CA.
    Posts
    468
    I'm surprised that there seemed to be so little news coverage of it. Unless I missed it.
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #329
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    6,896
    Originally posted by smueller
    Excellent points myles. for point 5, hot potato is not that common with other tier 1 peers? Or you're thinking mci might be scared by the level3 bully into eating the cost of not doing hot potato anymore? If mci is not doing hot potato, are their in/out balances important anymore?
    Hot potato style routing does exist, the difference really is, Cogent is very well known for it, MCI is not. Generally, transit providers benefit from traffic going through their network. If the network is well engineered, they can guarantee lower latency, packet loss, etc. as opposed to shoving it off-network at the ealriest opportunity.

    As for bullying MCI, I somewhat doubt this. MCI is an extremely arrogant company in general from my dealings, who are still living in the 90's in many respects (even pricing, well MCI Canada at least).

    point 6, although level3 would have the same routing issues because of potential cogent routing problems, mci would be more directly responsible for fixing them. Didn't know cogent had this issue, but makes sense for level3 not enjoying the peering relationship with cogent if level3 has to use up more of their technical resources researching and dealing with customers because of cogent problems.

    Politically, you've shed some light on level3's motivations. [/B]
    Cogent has a *long* and strong history of having saturated peering points, and issues with their peers, for years now. Typically they would use this as an argument against latency guarantee's, etc. as it's the other parties router thats latent (outside their internal network). After all, its easy to build a strong core network (relatively speaking) connecting it to the world is the tough part. Our own core network is over-built in nearly a 5:1 ratio when compared with our own transit/pereing links, its all internal, its easier to do, to manage, and its cheaper after all.

    If the hop between MCI and Cogent is latent also though, it looks bad on the two parties involved, MCI and Cogent. With Level3 out of that equation, they'll undoubtably look better when Cogent drops the ball. The average user is barely educated enough to read a traceroute, much less accurately decipher whats happening, very few people can discern whose at fault when a peering point is over-saturated, this is simply a burden L3 wont have to bear in that scenario.
    Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
    Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
    Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
    http://www.prioritycolo.com
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #330
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Posts
    367
    i'm so glad our company doesn't use either provider....
    SPEAKservers, LLC - Premium Hosting Solutions
    Dedicated & Virtual Servers - Colocation - Transport/DIA - VoIP
    sales@speakservers.com / scott@speakservers.com
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #331

    Peering only until October 9th...

    Unless Cogent wants to finally start talking. This is also Level 3 giving their side of the story:

    http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf057.html?.v=17

    Hal
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #332
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,207
    Originally posted by porcupine
    Bad move on Level3's part.

    They've let Cogents false publicity get the better of them, and it may cost them dearly (unless they did this to avoid potential action by the FCC). Cogents just going to continually play for time at this point, as they have in the past.
    Why bad move? They made a bad move to begin with which has cost thousands of customers a lot of money. They deserved the negative publicity they received and surely lost customers to Cogent.
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #333
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by Acroplex
    Why bad move? They made a bad move to begin with which has cost thousands of customers a lot of money. They deserved the negative publicity they received and surely lost customers to Cogent.
    Well, as Level(3) says: "Because Internet users, apparently without notice from Cogent and through no fault of their own, have been impacted, Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent. In order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements, we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005. The effectiveness of this arrangement of course depends on Cogent's willingness to maintain their side of the traffic exchange.

    Over the next 30 days, we will work diligently to help assure Internet connectivity is available to all users on a fair and open basis. Further, as has always been the case, we are willing to work with Cogent to reach a contractual arrangement that is equitable to both parties. If this is not possible, we expect that Cogent will make arrangements with one of the numerous alternative carriers currently offering such services."


    I would assume that this will last 30 days, allowing customers to find other means of reaching Cogent and vice versa and then L3 will again depeer Cogent, as it is their right to do. Read the statement, and you will see it says exactly what I and several others here have..
    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!

  9. #334
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Gilroy CA.
    Posts
    468
    So - Level 3 finally caved in.
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #335
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,207
    It's nothing but a calculated press release. The truth is, it has already cost L3 a lot: bad publicity, complaints, lost customers. The rest is fluff to maintain "Status".
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #336
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, CA
    Posts
    348
    Karl, acroplex asks why it's a bad move for level3 to restore the peering arrangement and you repeat level3's statement? You just like repeating things don't you? You're just like my wife. If you have points to make, you have to expand on repeating the same things.
    NewServers Utility Hosting
    http://www.newservers.com
    Low Hourly Billing for Dedicated Servers
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #337
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    6,896
    Originally posted by Acroplex
    Why bad move? They made a bad move to begin with which has cost thousands of customers a lot of money. They deserved the negative publicity they received and surely lost customers to Cogent.
    Why a bad move? Because they're giving into extortion, at least they've publically set another, *VERY* visible cut off date. What will you say if Cogent does nothing by this date? That it's all Level 3 again?

    Your posts are inflamatory, uneducated, and in utter disregard of common sense, and logic in regards to this entire matter; In short, you're trolling this thread with little to contribute. If you'd read all the posts in this thread, or the article, you'd already know this granted.
    Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
    Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
    Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
    http://www.prioritycolo.com
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #338
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by smueller
    Karl, acroplex asks why it's a bad move for level3 to restore the peering arrangement and you repeat level3's statement? You just like repeating things don't you? You're just like my wife. If you have points to make, you have to expand on repeating the same things.
    Sorry, I had meant to respond to the initial posting of the URL, just cutting out what I thought was important. I thought it would be beneficial to cut out the most important part of that, imho, so people would not need to read the whole article.

    It is not Level(3) caving in, but them showing that they don't want people to be hurt by this and are giving everyone on the Internet 30 days notice to get around the issue, and will again depeer Cogent in 30 days.

    At least I repeat the correct information over and over again unlike you...
    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!

  14. #339
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Gilroy CA.
    Posts
    468
    I don't agree. Level 3 got their butt kicked by Cogent big time and Level 3 was weak and folded under pressure. Cogent has proved it is to mighty to be messes with.
      0 Not allowed!

  15. #340
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,207
    Originally posted by porcupine

    Your posts are inflamatory, uneducated, and in utter disregard of common sense, and logic in regards to this entire matter; In short, you're trolling this thread with little to contribute. If you'd read all the posts in this thread, or the article, you'd already know this granted.
    I don't really care what you think of my posts. Your self-imposed "authority" on the matter is laughable and the end result is proving the fact that you're quite the opposite.

    Any more personal attacks? I suggest you stick to the facts, i.e. Level3 recognizing their fallacy 48 hours later. You call it extortion, I call it reality check.
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #341
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    6,957
    Originally posted by Acroplex
    I don't really care what you think of my posts. Your self-imposed "authority" on the matter is laughable and the end result is proving the fact that you're quite the opposite.

    Any more personal attacks? I suggest you stick to the facts, i.e. Level3 recognizing their fallacy 48 hours later. You call it extortion, I call it reality check.
    Well, then explain this line: we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005

    Why would Level(3) give a hard time/date for depeering in public if they are just bluffing? By giving such a date and not meeting it they would lose even more respect, etc. They are giving the full Internet notice, so no one has any excuses this time 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!

  17. #342
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    6,896
    Originally posted by Acroplex
    I don't really care what you think of my posts. Your self-imposed "authority" on the matter is laughable and the end result is proving the fact that you're quite the opposite.
    Where do you see me making claims of being an authority? I simply present myself as more cluefull on the matter then you, which is obviously leading you to that impression.

    If you're more educated on the matter, why dont you show it, stop evading the most simple of questions, and show us what you've got:

    1. Why should Level3 have to persue a settlement free peering session with Cogent at their own loss?
    2. Why should Level3 be unable to choose who they do and do not peer with?
    3. Do you believe in freedom? Does that apply to corporations, and businesses in general?
    4. Are you aware that the internet transit business is an unregulated market? Why do you think the FCC should be able to suddenly jump in and start pushing people around?
    5. Should all peering relationships be forced? If I unplug all of our transit connections, should the major players be forced to peer with us for free, because all of our users are offline? Perhaps if I only remove routes to one?

    Can you answer those with non-evasive answers?

    Any more personal attacks? I suggest you stick to the facts, i.e. Level3 recognizing their fallacy 48 hours later. You call it extortion, I call it reality check. [/B]
    Personal attacks? Observations. You prefer facts? Fine, you assumedly accept statements that appear to be factual made by either party unless disproven, correct? Lets try this exercise:

    1. Cogent was given 75 days advance notice.
    2. Cogent knew the ramificaitons of their actions, as they've done it 4 times before.
    3. Cogent posted misleading news releases indicating that Level3 was preventing their users from accessing their network
    4. Level3 obeyed their contract, and was within their right to terminate the relationship
    5. Cogent has had this happen 4 times previously, with the same result every time, whereas no other major "Tier 1" carrier has had this kind of issue in the past 3 years.
    6. Cogent has been utilizing this fiasco as a cheap advertising shot, by publishing misleading press releases, soliciting L3 customers to move, etc.
    7. The bandwidth market in general is not a regulated market
    8. Level3 has no legal, nor contractual obligations to retain a peering circuit with Cogent
    9. Level3 has clearly backed the Cogent PR machine down by turning the sessions back up, accompanied by a statement with their side of the story. Obviously L3 is still intent on terminating the session in one months time, which will still be within their legal, ethical, and contractual right to do.
    10. Cogent has a history of "hot potatoe" routing
    11. Cogent was sending dis-perportionate amounts of traffic to Level3, outside of equally profitable relationship
    12. Level3 felt they were getting a bad deal, and dealt with it in the most (and possibly only) legal manner available to them.

    Care to dispute any of those facts?
    Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
    Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
    Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
    http://www.prioritycolo.com
      0 Not allowed!

  18. #343
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    6,896
    Originally posted by KarlZimmer
    Well, then explain this line: we will maintain this connection until 6:00 a.m. ET, November 9, 2005

    Why would Level(3) give a hard time/date for depeering in public if they are just bluffing? By giving such a date and not meeting it they would lose even more respect, etc. They are giving the full Internet notice, so no one has any excuses this time around.
    And the sad thing is, while I ask myself "and who do you think more customers are going to leave", it really doesen't happen to be Cogent in this case (though one month isn't enough for most people to move IP's, anyone who has their own IP's has their own ASN/BGP assumedly, and wont care). Level3's got the high end customers who are clearly more impacted during a situation like this, compared to the typical Cogent porn/unmetered dedicated server customers, etc.

    Time will tell, lets just hope L3 doesen't back down a second time, Cogents built their entire network on other peoples losses and misery, how fitting do you get (talk about bad karma, a financially unsuatainable network based solely off looting bankrupt networks assets).
    Myles Loosley-Millman - admin@prioritycolo.com
    Priority Colo Inc. - Affordable Colocation & Dedicated Servers.
    Two Canadian facilities serving Toronto & Markham, Ontario
    http://www.prioritycolo.com
      0 Not allowed!

  19. #344
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    469
    Personally I feel Cogent's customers were more affected. I have a single homed level3 feed (fast-e) running some web sites and got, not 2, not 1, but 0 complaints of downtime, unreachability, ect.

    Level3 has the eyeballs, so if I had to choose between the two, I'd put my server on L3 for that exact reason.

    I think home users can live without their porn streams for a while until this clears up.
    bye
      0 Not allowed!

Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 411121314

Posting Permissions

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