Viable Third Option?

David Hubbard dhubbard at
Thu Feb 18 01:20:10 UTC 2021

Yep, unlike 3356 who could care less if you have an outage, NTT never fails to have a ticket opened and email to all the contact points within minutes of a BGP session going down, asking if we need any assistance.  I’ve been really happy with their noc on debugging issues, and just proactive contact in general.  The peering seems good, as does the pricing.

Cogent honestly hasn’t been bad, but the v6 thing, to Google of all places, just makes their CEO look like a sh*t head; he needs to check his ego and just pay for the peering since Google doesn’t appear to be the one who will blink first.  I mean how can you seriously sell a circuit to anyone in a data center and have a caveat that massive, that no other provider has.

From: Dovid Bender <dovid at>
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 at 4:50 PM
To: David Hubbard <dhubbard at>
Cc: "nanog at" <nanog at>
Subject: Re: Viable Third Option?

Second for NTT. We have found that their pricing wasn’t to far off from HE. I can count on one hand in 10 years how many times we had issues and needed to contact them.

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 14:06 David Hubbard <dhubbard at<mailto:dhubbard at>> wrote:
I’ve been pretty happy with NTT but their POPs can be limited; I’ve had to pick up waves to them, which sometimes still comes out ahead.  I’m slowly dropping Cogent due to the v6 issues.  I haven’t been able to try HE because they and a frequent colo provider I use (Switch) don’t seem to get along.

From: NANOG < at< at>> on behalf of Mike Hammett <nanog at<mailto:nanog at>>
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 at 11:52 AM
To: NANOG list <nanog at<mailto:nanog at>>
Subject: Viable Third Option?

This is from the perspective of an eyeball network. I understand that content networks would have different objectives and reasons. For instance, I have little to no reason as an eyeball network to exchange traffic with any other eyeball network (aside from P2P games). For a content network, getting into the eyeball networks is their objective.

My crystal ball tells me this thread will spiral out of control because people won't be able to keep it on topic, but it is a question that I hear VERY often. I also expect a lot of purely bad or outdated information to get thrown out.

Please try to keep it on topic and not being pedantic over relatively unimportant details.

There are two major low-cost providers, Cogent and HE.


  *   Refuses to peer IPv6 with HE
  *   Refuses to peer IPv6 with Google
  *   Aggressive sales tactics

  *   Doesn't have Cogent IPv6 because of Cogent's refusal
  *   Lack of communities for anything other than blackholes

I know there are a variety of other providers such as Fusion Network that operate at similar price points, but are available in way fewer locations.

What else is out there? Anyone else that isn't 5x, 10x the cost?

Cogent and HE get looked down upon (and sometimes deservedly so), but when I talk to someone trying to sell me a port in 350 Cermak for 8x the cost of Cogent and HE, you better have a very good argument for why you're worth it...  and they never do. "We're not Cogent." "and?" Many times I'm quoted transit that costs more than Cogent + IX + HE and they don't really have a good argument for it.

As an eyeball, I join an IX and there goes 50% - 85% of my traffic and almost all of my traffic that anyone is going to notice or complain about if there are issues (video streaming).

I do understand that enterprise eyeballs may have different requirements.

Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions<>
Error! Filename not specified.<>Error! Filename not specified.<>Error! Filename not specified.<>Error! Filename not specified.<>
Midwest Internet Exchange<>
Error! Filename not specified.<>Error! Filename not specified.<>Error! Filename not specified.<>
The Brothers WISP<>
Error! Filename not specified.<>Error! Filename not specified.<>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list