Cogent now peering with Sprint?

Fredy Kuenzler kuenzler at
Tue Oct 31 16:50:52 UTC 2006

Patrick W. Gilmore schrieb:
> Hrmm, I can't tell by looking at a traceroute who paid whom, if
> anyone. Care to explain your magic?  Is there a code in the in-addrs?
> Perhaps "sl-$FOO" means something in Sprint-speak?
> Secondly, does anyone really give a rat's ass who is "SFI" any
> longer? There are at least 2 fully "SFI" networks who can't route
> half as well as a whole slew of non-SFI networks these days.
> If [Cogent|Sprint] [buying|peering|whatever] [from|with]
> [Cogent|Sprint] makes their network better (i.e. lower latency, lower
> packet loss, higher throughput, and, if you care, lower jitter),  I
> applaud them.

I heard some rumours at the Euro-IX forum last week.

Fact: Deutsche Telekom 3320 is playing the power play currently not
upgrading their peering interconnections in Europe. 174 is experiencing
up to 30% packet loss versus 3320 in Europe, making customers suffer.
This is first hand info (we are involved with some popular content site
sending out up to 800MBps peak to German-speaking users, and appx. 1/3
is 3320).

Think of 174 started to peer with 1239 and redirecting some outbound
traffic to 3320 over this new peer. Since 3320 is buying from 1239, they
will pay more to 1239, and 1239 accepts 174 as a new peer because they
get more money from 3320 ... as mentioned, this is just a rumour I
heard, but reading William B. Norton's theory (tactic #9), this would
make sense.


More information about the NANOG mailing list