Cogent - Google - HE Fun

Thu Mar 10 22:58:20 UTC 2016

Freddy,

As there is no IPv6 transit between HE and Cogent, this would have the effect of isolating ones network services from the single-homed customers of Cogent.  I’m not sure that many of us could get away with that.  Further, I’m not sure that it’s appropriate to punish the single-homed Cogent customers.  I’ll grant, this is just what Google has done, but they’re well positioned to weather that storm and have a level of visibility and brand loyalty that will allow them to have a chance of success at it.

I think the softer approach of reducing the relevancy of Cogent’s IPv6 transit service and indeed the relevancy of peering with Cogent for IPv6 is a way forward that more of us could get behind.

Thanks,

Matt Hardeman

> On Mar 10, 2016, at 4:42 PM, Fredy Kuenzler <kuenzler at init7.net> wrote:
> 
> This would work for those which are using IPv6 transit from Cogent.
> 
> For anyone else which is using IPv6 transit from Hurricane Electric and some other suppliers such as L3 or NTT: to set the community 'do not announce to Cogent' only on every other transit but HE would help to isolate Cogent without much collateral damage. It would support Google/HE's position. And maybe help to bring back Cogent onto a cooperative track, after all.
> 
> --
> Fredy Kuenzler
> Init7 (Switzerland) Ltd.
> St.-Georgen-Strasse 70
> CH-8400 Winterthur
> Switzerland
> 
> http://www.init7.net/
> 
> 
>> Am 10.03.2016 um 23:19 schrieb Matthew D. Hardeman <mhardeman at ipifony.com>:
>> 
>> I have contemplated whether such mechanisms matter to Cogent, etc.
>> 
>> I’m inclined to think that if Google is willing to pull the routes and they still don’t blink, then certainly us smaller shops aren’t going to impact them…
>> 
>> However…  If enough prefixes disappear from the _apparent_ Cogent table as viewed by outsiders, this may ultimately impact their sales of new interconnection….
>> 
>> For those of us multihomed with Cogent and other transit providers on IPv6 there is a less drastic way to impact the perceived value of Cogent’s IPv6 routing table to outsiders and especially to Cogent’s peers — and one that still doesn’t negatively impact the single-home customers of Cogent:
>> 
>> "set community 174:3000" on your IPv6 advertisement to Cogent.  This will constrain the advertisement to Cogent and Cogent’s customers only.  For good measure, prepend your own AS to this advertisement at least a couple of times, potentially discouraging even Cogent customers who see the route from using it if they have other transit.  It will prevent the path via Cogent being selected by Cogent IPv6 peers versus your other transit providers.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 10, 2016, at 3:47 PM, Fredy Kuenzler <kuenzler at init7.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 10.03.2016 um 22:25 schrieb Damien Burke <damien at supremebytes.com>:
>>>> Anyone who is multihomed with cogent ipv6 in their mix should shutdown their IPv6 bgp session. Let’s see if we can make their graph freefall.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Alternative:
>>> 
>>> set community [do not announce to Cogent]
>>> 
>>> *SCNR*
>> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4190 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20160310/cd0925ef/attachment.bin>