On Oct 6, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Daniel Golding wrote:
Cogent does purchase transit from Verio to Sprint, AOL, and other
locations (but not to Level 3). Perhaps Dan would like to explain
why that is relevant to the discussion at hand? Or why that puts the
"ball" in Cogent's court?
Since you demanded it - Cogent buys transit. Regardless of what
their route
filters are currently set to, or what communities or arrangements
they have
with Verio, its transit. They purchase bandwidth to access other
networks.
Although I have not seen their transit contract, its not a stretch
to say
that they can use these connections to reach L3. I realize they may
claim
otherwise, but I have personal experience with them lying about their
transit arrangements. And no, not some call center rep or NOC guy,
either.
Try a Cogent executive.
I think you are confused. If Cogent pays Verio to receive (for
instance) only 1239 prefixes, and to propagate 174 prefixes only to
1239, then Cogent cannot "make a configuration change" to fix
things. It would require a contractual change.
But even if they could, why does this put the onus only on Cogent?
Cogent has just as much right to not spend money to reach L3 as L3
has to not spend money to reach Cogent.
Perhaps we are miscommunicating. I am not saying Cogent should not
buy transit to reach L3. It is a business decision, not a technical
argument. I am saying your idea of "Cogent buys transit, therefore
the ball is in Cogent's court" is Just Plain Wrong. The "ball" is in
_both_ of their "courts".
It is strange that people have to be reminded no network has the
"right" to use any other network's resources without permission.
Most people realize this in one direction. For instance, the "tier
ones" love to point out Cogent has no "right" to peer with Level 3.
Absolutely correct.
What some people seem to forget is that Level 3 has no right to force
Cogent to buy transit to get to Level 3.
Sure. Cogent is free to offer a partial routing table and take
their chances
with their customers.
If you think the inverse of the above is also true, we agree.
However, you posts have absolutely at least implied (and I would
argue outright claim) that L3 should not be expected to do anything
because they are in the "SFI club", and Cogent should do something
because they "buy transit".
Perhaps we do agree more than I thought. Did I misunderstand your
comments about SFI and balls and courts and stuff? Do you think this
situation is bilateral, or does one side have more responsibility to
ensure interconnectivity than the other?
--
TTFN,
patrick