IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric

Matthew Petach mpetach at netflight.com
Mon Dec 7 00:54:38 UTC 2015

On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Max Tulyev <maxtul at netassist.ua> wrote:
> On 04.12.15 01:19, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
>> On 1 December 2015 at 20:23, Max Tulyev <maxtul at netassist.ua> wrote:
>>> I have to change at least one of my uplinks because of it, which one is
>>> better to drop, HE or Cogent?
>> Question: Why would you have to drop one of them? You have no problem if
>> you have both.
> Because of money, isn't it? I don't want to pay twice!

Completely makes sense--you want to get the
most value possible for the dollars you spend,
which means you want to choose upstream
providers that give you the most complete
view of the internet possible.

> So as this is not a bug, but a long time story - I relized for me as a
> cutomer connectivity from both Hurricane Electric and Cogent is a crap.
> So people should avoid both, and buy for example from Level3 and NTT,
> which do not have such problem and do not sell me partial connectivity
> without any warning before signing the contract.
> I'm just a IP transit customer, and I don't give a something for that
> wars who is the real Tier1. I just want a working service for my money
> instead of answering a hundreds calls from my subscribers!

So, for you, the choice is going to come
down to a comparison of how much each
provider charges vs how much of a headache
they're creating for you in terms of partial
reachability problems.  While bigger entities
like Level 3 and NTT will give you fewer reachability
headaches, they're also likely to charge more; and
you don't want to put all your eggs in one basket.

So, hypothetically speaking, if Level3 and NTT
both charge $2/mb/s/month, and Cogent and
HE charge $0.75/mb/s/month, you might
find that you get a more cost-effective
blend by getting 3 circuits, one each
from Level3 OR NTT, and Cogent,
and HE, for a total cost of $2+$0.75+$0.75,
or $3.50, instead of the other option
of buying two circuits, one each
from Level3 and NTT, which would
be $2+$2, or $4.

Yes, I realize this is completely contrived
hypothetical set of prices, but the point is
only you have the knowledge of how much
each provider is charging you; take that
information, do a few searches in your
favorite search engine for "$PROVIDER
peering dispute", and see which providers
have the best and worst histories as far
as getting into peering disputes, and then
choose accordingly.

It would be nice if there were a rating
system for ISPs that would make it
easier for smaller companies to know
if they were buying from an "A" rated
ISP vs a "C" or "D" rated ISP, somewhat
like restaurants that have to post their
department of health scores visibly.
However, without any overseeing entity
that would provide such a rating service,
for now it's up to each buyer to do their
own research to decide which ISPs are
safer to work with, and which ones are

Best of luck making the right choices!



More information about the NANOG mailing list