North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Cogent service
- From: David Diaz
- Date: Fri Sep 20 10:34:41 2002
It seems the posts werent specific to your location, and you didnt
specify if you had any priorities in which (if any) backbones were
more important to you. Having been CTO at Netrail and dealing with
Cogent lately, you should see zero problems going to most backbones
such as uunet. The only negative routing comments Ive heard are
complaints about extra hop counts.
They are integrating 3 different AS#s so you can expect to see some
growth concerns, but that is normal and to be expected. Outside of
the extra hops, the people I know on the backbone are very happy.
The capacity to most peers is very good, and if you build an on-net
network with them you will see very good performance.
I think it's hard to complain when you are getting such an amazing
price. They are building their backbone by providing very large
pipes to customers and then managing the aggregate traffic levels.
Balancing of traffic is a concern for peering so they will probably
ask what kind of traffic you have. If you have eyeball traffic, Im
willing to be you could negotiate an even better deal. As their
traffic levels grow they will be an important backbone to peer with,
and that gives them more leverage in peering.
At the very least, if you are uncomfortable go multihomed. At their
pricing I would not be concerned at all to having them as one of my
providers. They are also responsive to any routing concerns.
The only drawback from the customer perspective has been mentioned.
They do not want to be everything to everyone. What that tells me is
that what they do, they are going to do very well, and they are
process oriented. Anyone that tries to be everything to everyone
usually isnt very good at anything.
If you are concerned about financials, name someone in better shape.
It's simple, multihome, or go into a facility where you can quickly
move a cross-connect to another provider (thanks Jay Adelson for
burning that idea into my head).
At 23:54 -0400 9/19/02, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
On 19 Sep 2002, Paul Vixie wrote:
> Does anyone have any comments (good or bad) about Cognet as a transit
> provider in New York?
No. But we (ISC) are using them in San Francisco (at 200 Paul Street) and
they've been fine.
They seem to have above-normal congestion at their peering points. They
are prepending 2x on their Sprint and MFN(AboveNet) transit. I guess this
has shifted too much traffic to the peering they acquired through PSI and
NetRail. They also have very poor routing for some ASNs like 577
(preferring long peered routes over much shorter transit routes).
I was also very surprised to see they prepend on BGP announcements to
their own customers. If you're multihomed then it means a bit more work
to try to avoid paying for a mostly empty Cogent pipe.
If financial stability is a concern for you, then I suggest reading the
debt covenants in their SEC filings. On one hand I doubt they'll be able
to live up to them by Q2 2003, but then Cisco is their main investor so
the consequences may not be that bad if they fail to meet them.
Smotons (Smart Photons) trump dumb photons