Cogent Considerations [was: Re: Cogent Haiku v2.0]
brandon.galbraith at gmail.com
Mon Jan 12 18:59:23 UTC 2009
On 1/12/09, Jim Shankland <nanog at shankland.org> wrote:
> Adam Young wrote:
>> I wouldn't take my word for it but truthfully, you get what you pay for.
>> Given you have other, more reliable transit, adding Cogent may be ok.
>> I wouldn't rely on it for anything serious though.
> That has not been my experience. Peering wars have been an issue, but
> aside from that, they've been fine. (This is transit in San Francisco
> at the gigabit-plus level.)
> Jim Shankland
Seconded. We also have Cogent for gigabit transit. I had far more problems
in the short time we used Level3 for transit than I've had with Cogent.
Email: brandon.galbraith at gmail.com
More information about the NANOG