Whats going on at Cogent

Tue Oct 16 15:34:33 UTC 2018

That’s also true.. If you have a 10G connection between two DCs, and they can’t hash the traffic, you can only use 1/4th or 1/5th of the connection. Basically it is 10G but only 2G per flow. If you get transit at both places and then use a tunnel, which is a different service and may not satisfy all requirements, then you can use the full 10G, even with one flow. Otherwise you need to split it into 5 or more flows. 

I guess people really don’t like Cogent judging by the fact that one unrelated email caused all this to happen again.. :-)

> On 16 Oct 2018, at 18:01, David Hubbard <dhubbard at dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
> 
> Yeah google is the issue for us.  We provide web services and a LOT of our customers have software that is making calls of various types to Google services, or even just email delivery to Google hosted email; if all but a Cogent transit link to a given data center were down, all of those customers’ sites would begin failing at some level because the servers generally try v6 if the application level wasn’t explicit.  Cogent doesn’t seem to care since their CEO is in some pissing match with Google.  They must be deriving enough revenue from last mile v4-only turn ups that they don’t really care about dual stack customers.
>  
> That being said, can’t say I’ve been impressed with their MPLS / metroE offerings either.  When doing the pricing/sizing routine on a project, I learned that they have an internal concept of src-dst flows on those types of circuits, and if they can’t see your labels, or otherwise hash the traffic, or it all truly is point to point, you may not get the full bandwidth, or may need to buy a capacity larger than what the flow will be.
>  
> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces at nanog.org> on behalf of DaKnOb <daknob.mac at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 10:06 AM
> To: Dovid Bender <dovid at telecurve.com>
> Cc: NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Whats going on at Cogent
>  
> When I call and mention it I’m told that it’s HE’s fault (despite the lovely cake), but when I also bring Google, then they tell me to get a different provider just for this traffic, or meet them at an IX and send my traffic from there.
>  
> About the staff rotation I’ve seen it too, and I’ve also seen an increase in salespeople calling, for example when an AS is registered etc. in addition to the normal calls..
> 
> On 16 Oct 2018, at 16:54, Dovid Bender <dovid at telecurve.com> wrote:
> 
> They call me every few months. the last time they emailed me I said I wasn't interested because of the HE issue. I have yet to get another email.......
>  
>  
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Ca By <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>  
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 5:16 AM David Hubbard <dhubbard at dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
> Have had the same sales rep for several years now; unfortunately he has no ability to fix their IPv6 peering issue so we’re slowly removing circuits, but otherwise for a handful of 10gig DIA circuits it’s been stable.
>  
>  
> Yep, this.  Whenever Cogent calls, this is what i tell them. Black-holing HE and Google ipv6 traffic, which is what they do if i use a default route from them, is dead on arrival.  Shows they make bad decisions and dont put the customer first, or even create such an illusion. 
>  
>  
> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces at nanog.org> on behalf of Ryan Gelobter <ryan.g at atwgpc.net>
> Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 6:04 AM
> To: NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Whats going on at Cogent
>  
> Anyone else seen terrible support and high turnover of sales/account people at Cogent the last few months? Is there something going on over there internally? I'm sure some people will say Cogent has always been crap but in the past their account reps and support were pretty good. It seems to have gone downhill the last 12 months really bad.
>  
> Regards,
> Ryan
>  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181016/8f93bdb3/attachment.html>