Netflix To Cogent To World

Adam Rothschild asr at latency.net
Wed Jul 23 17:00:53 UTC 2014


I think the confusion by Jay and others is that there is a plethora of commercial options available for sending traffic to Comcast or Verizon, at scale and absent congestion.  I contend that there is not.

I, too, have found Netflix highly responsive and professional, as a peering partner...

$0.02,
-a

On Jul 23, 2014, at 11:31 AM, Bob Evans <bob at FiberInternetCenter.com> wrote:

> Most likely Netflix writes policies to filter known cogent conflict
> peers...Chances are they use cogent to reach the cogent customer base and
> other peers.  I know from experience that peering directly with Netflix
> works very well....they don't depend heavily on transit delivery if direct
> peering is possible.
> 
> Thank You
> Bob Evans
> CTO
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> If I were Netflix, why would I buy all my transit from Cogent[1], given
>>> Cogent's propensity for getting into peering fights with people
>>> *already*,
>>> even before *I* start sending them 1000:1 asymmetric outbound traffic?
>> 
>> Perhaps Netflix expect this to be an ongoing problem with moree ISPs
>> asking them to pay to deliver (following Bretts lead ;-), so with their
>> previous transits experience why would they continue to buy from pussies?
>> 
>>> So why would Cogent offer Netflix a helluva deal?
>> 
>> Previous events have shown Cognet only use live rounds, so why would they
>> not take the opportunity to get a bigger gun?
>> 
>> Mutually assured domination. Perhaps one will buy the other sometime.
>> 
>> brandon
>> 
> 
> 



More information about the NANOG mailing list