cogent spamming directly from ARIN records?

Mon Oct 2 20:59:11 UTC 2023

On Mon, Oct 2, 2023, 12:14 Mark Tinka <mark at tinka.africa> wrote:

>
>
> On 10/2/23 20:58, Tim Burke wrote:
>
> > Hurricane has been doing the same thing lately... but their schtick is
> to say that "we are seeing a significant amount of hops in your AS path and
> wanted to know if you are open to resolve this issue".
>
> I get what HE are trying to do here, as I am sure all of us do.
>
> The potential fallout is a declining relationship with their existing
> customers that bring other downstream ISP's behind them. Contacting
> those downstream ISP's to "resolve this issue" puts them at odds with
> their existing customers who bring those customers in already.
>
> There is a chance they dilute their income because, well, smaller ISP's
> will not be keen to pay the higher transit fees their upstreams pay to
> HE. Which means that HE are more willing to be closer to eyeballs than
> they are maximizing margins.
>

Huh?

In all my decades of time in the network industry, I have never seen a case
where a smaller transit contract had lower per mbit cost than a larger
volume contract.

I would expect that HE would make *more* money off 10 smaller customer
transit contracts than one big tier 3 wholesaler transit contract.

It seems like a win-win for HE:
more customer revenue *and* shorter hop-count paths they can advertise to
the rest of the world.

Is the loss of customer trust worth the transit-free glory?
>

When it's offset by more revenue?

Sure seems like it.   ;)

> Mark.
>

Matt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20231002/c9f89eea/attachment.html>