The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane Electric - and how to solve it

Doug Barton dougb at dougbarton.us
Sat Jan 23 20:21:09 UTC 2016


On 01/23/2016 02:43 AM, Tore Anderson wrote:
> William,
>
>> Don't get me wrong. You can cure this fraud without going to extremes.
>> An open peering policy doesn't require you to buy hardware for the
>> other guy's convenience. Let him reimburse you or procure the hardware
>> you spec out if he wants to peer. Nor do you have to extend your
>> network to a location convenient for the other guy. Pick neutral
>> locations where you're willing to peer and let the other guy build to
>> them or pay you to build from there to him. Nor does an open peering
>> policy require you to give the other guy a free ride on your
>> international backbone: you can swap packets for just the regions of
>> your network in which he's willing to establish a connection. But not
>> ratios and traffic minimums -- those are not egalitarian, they're
>> designed only to exclude the powerless.
>>
>> Taken in this context, the Cogent/HE IPv6 peering spat is very simple:
>> Cogent is -the- bad actor. 100%.
>
> I'm curious: How do you know that Cogent didn't offer to peer under
> terms such as the ones you mention, but that those were refused by HE?

Because Cogent has repeatedly stated that they refuse to peer, period?

Doug




More information about the NANOG mailing list