CapinPete
Premium
join:2002-12-23
Loxahatchee, FL | That's right
Good move by Level 3. There will be no one to blame when the connections go down on 11/09 but Cogent and their sorry asses.
--
www.thegng.org - GNG Adult Gaming Community |
|
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL | Wasted Lawsuit on the brinks?
Why do I have a feeling that Cogent will file a lawsuit against Level3 that will expand for a 1 year or more and will consume millions of dollars? |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to CapinPete
Re: That's right
said by CapinPete  :Good move by Level 3. There will be no one to blame when the connections go down on 11/09 but Cogent and their sorry asses. That puts the ball back in Cogent's court and calls them out as liars in their press release.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
bored_in_nh
join:2003-01-04
Stamping Ground, KY
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Rob
Re: Wasted Lawsuit on the brinks?
good call. However, I wouldn't use the word "wasted". After all we have something like 89 bazilion lawyers in this country. They've got to have something to do  :p
--
FEMA = Federal Emergency Mismanagement Agency |
|
Dan
Hamilton Tigers?
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Eh?
1 edit | reply to Rob
thats a noble thing for level 3 to do.
cogent's users should thank level 3 for their commitment to it's customers' customers.
cogent should drop any suit, and just pay the friggin debt they owe. |
|
Kip patterson
Premium
join:2000-10-23
Columbus, OH | reply to CapinPete
Re: That's right
That was a well-crafted press release. It certainly will defuse criticism of Level3, as it should in my opinion. |
|
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:
 ·VOIPo
| reply to Rob
Re: Wasted Lawsuit on the brinks?
said by Rob :Why do I have a feeling that Cogent will file a lawsuit against Level3 that will expand for a 1 year or more and will consume millions of dollars? Exactly... And their current customers will be the ones paying for it. If I were a current customer at this point, I would be doing my homework and finding out just exactly what has transpired between these two. From their I would be making a decision as to whether or not to dump Cogent or stick with them.
From what little I have read and seen at this point, the info here and some of the links posted about Cogent's past history with other peers, I think I would be quickly looking for a new provider. Even if it cost me to get out of my contract. I would rather take a hit now rather than losing connectivity later and be scrambling to get my business re-connected with a new provider.
--
FWD#: 223611 |
|
Spicolli
join:2002-08-03
Saint Paul, MN | Re
If I was another carrier who could swoop in on some of these customers I would offer a rebate equal to the fee for dropping cogent. I bet they would get a lot of new customers, and get them locked in to a new contract. |
|
texas net
@playnet.com
 from:
rec9140
| Level3 restored connectivity because their own customers were the ones complaining, and leaving. I'm one of them that called Level3 and told them I am cancelling my contract.
Level3 pulled the plug on Cogent, and Level3 knew it would affect my business, I pay Level3 and they did this with absolutely no warning to me, their customer that they were going to do this.
They warn me about every little maintenance item that can posibly affect me, but when they are about to cut off access for 15% of my customer for political reasons they don't warn me at all? Totally irresponsible and inexcuseable.
Nice try at covering their own backsides, but it wasn't cogent's users that spurred them to reconnect, Level3 on their own site brags of having 5 of the top 6 dial up ISP's using their network, it was Level3's customers that forced Level3 to reconnect directly. |
|
lua6
Premium
join:2002-08-15
New York, NY | i could kiss you right now |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| reply to CapinPete
Re: That's right
But it was Level(3) that turned this back up because THEIR customers were complaining to them.
Do you think that having so many large dialup ISP's and RoadRunner as their customers that they weren't catching any flack from this? They did this to appease their own customers. There is no reason to think otherwise. Level(3)'s customers were complaining to Level(3), and Level(3) stopped it.
If Cogent lets it drop on Nov. 9, then Level(3) can have a better excuse to give their customers. But I doubt it will stop them from complaining. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| reply to Rob
Re: Wasted Lawsuit on the brinks?
said by Rob :Why do I have a feeling that Cogent will file a lawsuit against Level3 that will expand for a 1 year or more and will consume millions of dollars? Unless Level3 is really stupid, their peering contract most likely has a line that says something along the lines of "this agreement may be terminated without cause by either party with at least X days of notice".
There's nothing to sue for... |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | reply to texas net
Re: Re
also don't forget L3 is where a lot of VoIP providers go for their network, especially E-911 and numbers. |
|
sherman10570
join:2000-10-15
Pleasantville, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Just as everyone here suspected...
said by Level 3 :
»biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051007/laf0···ml?.v=17
[...]
Free peering, also referred to as settlement-free peering, is a contractual relationship under which two companies exchange Internet traffic without charging each other.
[...]
Cogent was sending far more traffic to the Level 3 network than Level 3 was sending to Cogent's network.
[...]
Simply put, this means that, without paying, Cogent was using far more of Level 3's network, far more of the time, than the reverse. Following our review, we decided that it was unfair for us to be subsidizing Cogent's business.
Can anything else be said? Fucking Cogent...
- Sherman |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to sporkme
Re: Wasted Lawsuit on the brinks?
said by sporkme :Unless Level3 is really stupid, their peering contract most likely has a line that says something along the lines of "this agreement may be terminated without cause by either party with at least X days of notice". said by Cogent, in the first cutoff notice :
"As of 5:30 am EDT, October 5th, Level(3) terminated peering with Cogent without cause (as permitted under its peering agreement with Cogent) my emphasis - SJF Guess they got that covered already.
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
jeffs471
join:2005-09-16
Camarillo, CA | reply to texas net
Re: Re
I agree with level 3's actions. Cogent is to blame. |
|
texas net
@playnet.com
from:
rec9140
| reply to sherman10570
Re: Just as everyone here suspected...
Yes something else can be said. Cogent isn't using Level3's bandwidth at all. Level3 customers are using Level3's bandwidth. They just happen to be downloading more from Cogent than they upload, like ANY user does.
Level3 has the vast majority of dialup users on the net, and all dailups download tons more than they upload.
Those dialup customers are downloading at their max bandwidth, and they pay level 3 to have the bandwidth available so they can.
The peering just allows the data to go straight from Cogent to Level3, Cogent only sends what Level3 paying customers request from them. And those dailup customers already pay Level3 for every bit of the bandwidth they use/pull from Cogent.
Level 3 just wants to get paid twice, I might too if I was facing bankruptcy and lost 350 million dollars last year like Level3. |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou | You have no idea what you are talking about. |
|
PunkGod
join:2003-02-02
1 edit | reply to CapinPete
Re: That's right
Maybe good for them but I have roadrunner and I noticed alot of websites I visit wouldn't come up and the ones I could were slow as hell.
I got back to looking at a few websites and noticed it seemed faster than earlier. I came here and noticed they reconnected. |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to texas net
Re: Just as everyone here suspected...
said by texas net :
Cogent isn't using Level3's bandwidth at all. Level3 customers are using Level3's bandwidth. They just happen to be downloading more from Cogent than they upload, like ANY user does. So what? That's not how peering works
Level(3)'s job is to get the traffic to the edge of their network, and they're doing so.
The settlement-free handoff with Cogent is part of a contract: if you think that contracts don't matter, and some kind of good-of-the-universe should take over, you're not going to find many adherents.Level 3 just wants to get paid twice Yes, that's exactly how it works, and Cogent does the same thing. If we're both Cogent customers and I send traffic to you, both of us pay them for it. We're not talking cellphones here with Friends and Family plans where everybody "in" the network is free - that's just not how it works.
It took me a while to get my arms around this too: the rate that an ISP charges its customers is independent of what it manages on the peering/interconnect front. Once you agree to pay $X per megabit, then the carrier gets to do pretty much anything to lower its own costs to provide that to you. If they manage to swing some killer peering deals, that's all the better for them.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
