SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)

William Yardley nanog at
Thu Mar 15 19:12:03 UTC 2007

On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 11:39:49AM -0700, Berkman, Scott wrote:

> To me the only part of this that is up for argument is did SaidCom
> actually violate the contract and/or terms of use, and I certainly don't
> have enough information beyond that one article to make that decision.
> If someone else does please share with the group.

I will say that I've used Level(3) as a transit provider (not the only
one, of course) at 2 different companies (both of which were / are
pretty responsive to abuse complaints, in one case because I was the one
responding to them), and I have never had an issue like this.

However, both of these were content / hosting type setups, not ISPs who
provide local Internet access, so the type of complaints (and probably
the volume) were different than your typical ISP.

I don't think there's any way to know for sure who screwed up here...
maybe the small provider wasn't as responsive as they say they are, but
are trying to shift the blame to (3). Or maybe (3) was trigger-happy. I
don't think anyone from the outside has the information to tell for sure
which happened.

But Level(3) is a pretty big provider, and if they were just shutting
off small competitors willy-nilly, I imagine we'd be hearing about it


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog at [mailto:owner-nanog at] On Behalf Of
> Frank Bulk
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 10:30 PM
> To: nanog at
> Subject: SaidCom disconnected by Level 3 (former Telcove property)
> Is this a normal thing for Level 3 to do, cut off small, responsive
> providers?
> Frank

More information about the NANOG mailing list