<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>hello</p>
<p>nobody has to peer with some operator for free. they are simply
trading internet services. they do not have to believe in FREE (as
in price) internet connectivity.. if they peered you, you would
decrease the price of the products even more and more...<br>
</p>
<p>ask cogentco (as174) for paid peering. they will give you nice
paid peering or ip transit offer that you can use for both ipv4
and ipv6.</p>
<p>for example i would assume they would be OK charging he.net
(as6939) 5 usd cent per megabit.</p>
<p>you need to understand that you are never going to become tier1
without support from as174. they are currently cheapest and they
are okay with dual homing too. think like united nations security
council.<br>
</p>
<p>you must think twice; are you gaining any profit by segmenting
world-wide internet? or are you loosing prospective single-homing
customers because you lack connectivity to as174 clients?</p>
<p>we must think big. asking for a money is OKay while begging for
FREE service is not... operating NOC and backbone has some
expenses that henet wouldnt understand with their rented links.
cogentco bear much more expenses than henet</p>
<p>i am not here to insult henet but i honestly think that they are
contemptible... just like google's peering decision makers.</p>
<p>sir! if you have become big content/eyeball operator, doesnt mean
that every operator in the industry have to respect your tier-1
policy and give you their services for free. thats the thing henet
and google couldnt understand. think like UNSC and you will
understand</p>
<p>even USA can not do anything they want in the world, as RU has
voting right, too.</p>
<p>TL;DR; instead of crying here and begging for free service. send
real representatives that could negotiate the money you would pay.</p>
<p>bye<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>