Cogent - Google - HE Fun

Mon Mar 14 17:41:09 UTC 2016

I would have concurred on this not so very long ago, but Cogent has made serious strides in improving this.

In particular, I think Cogent is fairly trustworthy to at least AT&T and Verizon at this point.

As for Charter, Comcast, Cox, and the like, I’ve come to believe that there’s really no substitute for direct interconnection to those guys if they’re part of the market you serve.

My clients are mostly ISPs and ITSPs and for the over-the-top ITSPs, if they’re serving clients whose broadband access is one of the major cable providers, I always encourage the client to establish a BGP session directly into that provider (whether purchasing enterprise transit from them, but just accepting customer routes and advertising with a no-export prefix or formal paid peering, etc.)

The impact that it has on service quality is measurable and it’s a significant impact in many cases.

> On Mar 14, 2016, at 9:58 AM, Matthew Huff <mhuff at ox.com> wrote:
> 
> One caveat about Cogent even as a third or extra provider.
> 
> Because of disputes with eyeball networks, there is significant congestion at peering points with Cogent. We saw consistent 5-10% packet loss over many months traversing Cogent through to Charger, Cox and Verizon as well as others. For web access and even streaming video, with buffers, this might not be an issue. But for corporate use with VOIP and/or VPNs, it was a killer. We had to cancel our Cogent service and work with our remaining providers to de-preference Cogent completely.
> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Matthew Huff             | 1 Manhattanville Rd
> Director of Operations   | Purchase, NY 10577
> OTA Management LLC       | Phone: 914-460-4039
> aim: matthewbhuff        | Fax:   914-694-5669
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] On Behalf Of William Herrin
>> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 10:47 AM
>> To: James Milko <jmilko at gmail.com>
>> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
>> 
>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, James Milko <jmilko at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:32 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
>> wrote:
>>>> At the very least, no one who is clueful about "The Internet" is
>>>> single-homed to Cogent with any protocol.
>>> 
>>> s/single-homed/dual-homed/
>>> 
>>> It's not like losing Google/HE because your other transit dropped is
>>> acceptable.
>> 
>> Hi James,
>> 
>> Cogent is effective at reducing cost as the third or subsequent provider
>> in one's mix.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Bill Herrin
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
>> Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4190 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20160314/33489d71/attachment.bin>