Cogent - Google - HE Fun

Matthew D. Hardeman mhardeman at
Mon Mar 14 18:31:56 UTC 2016

I understand.  I tend to take a more market by market view of each network rather than a global perspective.  Clearly, for the enterprise use case with a diversity of users spread across the globe, or even nationally, the use case is a bit different.

Having said that, I am rather terribly curious...  I’ve not really seen any of the major national non-eyeballs who didn’t have congestion at some peering points to major eyeball networks for not insignificant periods. 

Which transit have you found to be the very best for minimizing those concerns in the general case?

> On Mar 14, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Matthew Huff <mhuff at> wrote:
> We don't serve a market. We are a private business. We are multi-homed with multiple providers, none of which is an eyeball network. Even if we wanted to peer, most of them are not available in our area, but our the only choice for some of our employees.
> Cogent still has congestion issues at various peering points as has been reported in this and other mailing lists recently. Like I said, if VOIP and VPN aren't an issue, go ahead and use cogent. But if packet loss makes your access useless, then avoid them if it all possible. YMMV.
> ----
> Matthew Huff             | 1 Manhattanville Rd
> Director of Operations   | Purchase, NY 10577
> OTA Management LLC       | Phone: 914-460-4039
> aim: matthewbhuff        | Fax:   914-694-5669
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Matthew D. Hardeman [mailto:mhardeman at]
>> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 1:41 PM
>> To: Matthew Huff <mhuff at>
>> Cc: William Herrin <bill at>; James Milko <jmilko at>;
>> nanog at
>> Subject: Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
>> I would have concurred on this not so very long ago, but Cogent has made
>> serious strides in improving this.
>> In particular, I think Cogent is fairly trustworthy to at least AT&T and
>> Verizon at this point.
>> As for Charter, Comcast, Cox, and the like, I’ve come to believe that
>> there’s really no substitute for direct interconnection to those guys if
>> they’re part of the market you serve.
>> My clients are mostly ISPs and ITSPs and for the over-the-top ITSPs, if
>> they’re serving clients whose broadband access is one of the major cable
>> providers, I always encourage the client to establish a BGP session
>> directly into that provider (whether purchasing enterprise transit from
>> them, but just accepting customer routes and advertising with a no-
>> export prefix or formal paid peering, etc.)
>> The impact that it has on service quality is measurable and it’s a
>> significant impact in many cases.
>>> On Mar 14, 2016, at 9:58 AM, Matthew Huff <mhuff at> wrote:
>>> One caveat about Cogent even as a third or extra provider.
>>> Because of disputes with eyeball networks, there is significant
>> congestion at peering points with Cogent. We saw consistent 5-10% packet
>> loss over many months traversing Cogent through to Charger, Cox and
>> Verizon as well as others. For web access and even streaming video, with
>> buffers, this might not be an issue. But for corporate use with VOIP
>> and/or VPNs, it was a killer. We had to cancel our Cogent service and
>> work with our remaining providers to de-preference Cogent completely.
>>> ----
>>> Matthew Huff             | 1 Manhattanville Rd
>>> Director of Operations   | Purchase, NY 10577
>>> OTA Management LLC       | Phone: 914-460-4039
>>> aim: matthewbhuff        | Fax:   914-694-5669
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at] On Behalf Of William
>> Herrin
>>>> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 10:47 AM
>>>> To: James Milko <jmilko at>
>>>> Cc: nanog at
>>>> Subject: Re: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, James Milko <jmilko at>
>> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:32 PM, William Herrin <bill at>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> At the very least, no one who is clueful about "The Internet" is
>>>>>> single-homed to Cogent with any protocol.
>>>>> s/single-homed/dual-homed/
>>>>> It's not like losing Google/HE because your other transit dropped is
>>>>> acceptable.
>>>> Hi James,
>>>> Cogent is effective at reducing cost as the third or subsequent
>> provider
>>>> in one's mix.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Bill Herrin
>>>> --
>>>> William Herrin ................ herrin at  bill at
>>>> Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4190 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list