cogent bgp filtering policies?

Joe Maimon jmaimon at ttec.com
Sun Jul 27 19:57:12 CDT 2008


John van Oppen wrote:
> That software might be a good solution for sending them updates, heck a
> script sending it out every time it detects an update might also cause
> them to get more excited about automating updates.   ;)   We also had
> issues with them wanting a paper (or faxed) LOA which seemed a bit
> onerous given the number of prefixes we announce.
> 
> The le 24 matches should have been easy since the reason we wanted them
> were because we have customers using their own ASNs to announce
> sub-allocations of our space, a quick look on their part the first time
> we made the request would have shown that the sub allocations were all
> originated from downstream ASNs from our network.   

make sure their max-prefix limit resets automatically and is high enough

> 
> If anyone has an engineering contact at cogent (ie not the support
> contact) I would love to talk to them as it seems support department
> front-end is the problem and not necessarily cogent's actual policies.


No their policy is to give you a hard time until you jump through their 
hoops and then you get what you want.


> 
> Thanks,
> 
> John van Oppen
> Spectrum Networks LLC
> 206.973.8302 (Direct)
> 206.973.8300 (main office)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Wall [mailto:pauldotwall at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 4:30 PM
> To: John van Oppen
> Cc: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: Re: cogent bgp filtering policies?
> 
> Cogent does not support IRR.  Since you're using IRR yourself, Richard
> Steenbergen's IRRPT (irrpt.sf.net) has a script called 'irrpt_nag'
> which is good for sending automated requests for prefix-list updates
> with providers that continue to process them manually.
> 
> You can (and should) ask that Cogent's "Engineering" department okay
> you for support for de-aggregation down to the /24 level or more
> specific.  They will with proper justification or a general feeling
> that you've got good reason and aren't just looking to gratuitously
> de-aggregate prefixes for no reason.
> 
> Drive Slow,
> Paul
> 
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 5:59 AM, John van Oppen <john at vanoppen.com>
> wrote:
>> Now that I am on my third round of an email argument with cogent's
>> support department about adding prefixes to our filters (and them not
>> understanding why I want le 24 matches on the blocks from which we
>> allocate subnets to multi-homed customers) I figure it would be a good
>> idea to ask if anyone has ever gotten cogent to setup any IRR based
>> filtering on a customer connection.
>>
>>
>>
>> We are a small-ish regional transit provider in the northwest
> announcing
>>> 100 prefixes and just spent the last few days writing emails and
>> calling trying to get cogent to accept more than 30% of the routes we
>> were announcing.    We have IRR (radb to be specific) filters set up
>> with our other four providers which really lowered my tolerance for
>> having to go round and round to get prefixes added.   Heck, at this
>> point I would settle for a direct email address for their engineering
>> department just to avoid the arguments with the support monkeys.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I should note that this is actually the second time I have had this
>> issue (the last time was with one of our customers and their cogent
>> connection) even though we only turned up our service recently.
>>
>>
>>
>> John van Oppen
>>
>> AS11404
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 




More information about the NANOG mailing list