trparky
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
clubs:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
1 edit | I wouldn't use Cogent even if they paid me!
If I had the choice of choosing who to provide me bandwidth for a server, I definitely wouldn't choose Cogent. They couldn't pay me to take their service!
Why would I choose them when there are other providers that offer far better SLAs and better service?
--
Tom |
|
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
 ·Comcast
1 edit | We use around 200-300Mbit/sec of Cogent bandwidth consistently and they are terrific. We have a 100% up time SLA and our users have seen latency drop 2:1 and speeds increase over our last provider which was multi homed with Level 3 and a few others. I don't think anyone who bashes Cogent has ever really used them.
I always receive top-notch support from their NOC, and they have been willing to make adjustments to accept our equipment. |
|
Tikker_LoS
join:2004-04-29
Regina, SK | it's not really the small time companies this is about, but rather the big backbone type guys |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
 ·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
 ·Embarq
| reply to trparky
said by trparky  :Why would I choose them when there are other providers that offer far better SLAs and better service? $7/mbps on 1000+ mbps commitments.
Are they perfect? No.
Are they good enough for 99.5% of Internet applications? Absolutely.
Most customers aren't completely reliant on Cogent, but rather just use them as one of a few different Internet uplink options. |
|
UnKown
The Underground Network
join:2002-09-08
Orlando, FL
·Earthlink Cable Mo..
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to trparky
Cogent's business model is spectacular. Its all about bulk. They have one of the best data networks on the globe. We should see other big tier 1 providers doing the same thing as cogent. It doesn't cost these companies nearly as much as they are charging to run the network. Cogent is just bringing competition to the ball game. I loved how cogent sent letters to level 3 customers who were affected by the disconnect, offering the customers a great discount on their service. I hope they do the same to this swedish company. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| reply to trparky
said by trparky :If I had the choice of choosing who to provide me bandwidth for a server, I definitely wouldn't choose Cogent. They couldn't pay me to take their service! Why would I choose them when there are other providers that offer far better SLAs and better service? Perhaps this is why you are not in the position of choosing a bandwidth provider?
7 or 8 years ago, I too bought into the rhetoric that Cogent bandwidth was somehow inferior. This FUD all emanated from Cogent's then competitors like AT&T, Level(3), Global Crossing, etc. who were all selling $300/Mb IP . They all said cogent couldn't possibly survive selling $10/Mb IP.
Well, we have IP from AT&T/Level(3)/Telia/Sprint...and Cogent for the past 6 years and they are all about the same in terms of performance and reliability. The only difference is now all of those former high-cost providers are pricing the same or below Cogent's list price. |
|
wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| reply to Tikker_LoS
said by Tikker_LoS :it's not really the small time companies this is about, but rather the big backbone type guys No, this is directly about the smaller companies. Cogent's "fire sale" pricing model appeals to small companies who were previously paying close to $1000 per month for their T1's. If their peering arrangements get messed up like last time, that means Joe and Schmo business owner cant reach a big portion of the sites they try to access. Because they are so cheap, and their network is so questionable, most companies only use them as a backup (or backup, backup!) to their primary internet connection. I personally dont see anything wrong with using them, but people need to understand their business model and make appropriate arrangements in case of a failure.
--
с новым годом |
|
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
| reply to UnKown
said by UnKown :Cogent's business model is spectacular. Its all about bulk. They have one of the best data networks on the globe. We should see other big tier 1 providers doing the same thing as cogent. It doesn't cost these companies nearly as much as they are charging to run the network. Cogent is just bringing competition to the ball game. I loved how cogent sent letters to level 3 customers who were affected by the disconnect, offering the customers a great discount on their service. I hope they do the same to this swedish company. Cogent's business model is only spectacular if your not a peer having to intake hundreds of TB's of their traffic, while outputting very little of your traffic to their network.
It's the equivalent of you splitting the water bill with your roomate 50/50 and then finding out your roommate takes 6 showers a day, owns 9 aquariums, and likes to listen to the sound of running water just because it makes him giggle.
Other data providers aren't "jealous" of Cogent's model, they just aren't blatant assholes. If they truly wanted to get into a pricing war with Cogent they easily could and would not need to resort to harming customers on both sides like they do everytime a peering agreement is unexpectedly cut.
--
Forum Posts:7500 |
|
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
2 edits | reply to dogma
said by dogma :said by trparky :If I had the choice of choosing who to provide me bandwidth for a server, I definitely wouldn't choose Cogent. They couldn't pay me to take their service! Why would I choose them when there are other providers that offer far better SLAs and better service? Perhaps this is why you are not in the position of choosing a bandwidth provider? 7 or 8 years ago, I too bought into the rhetoric that Cogent bandwidth was somehow inferior. This FUD all emanated from Cogent's then competitors like AT&T, Level(3), Global Crossing, etc. who were all selling $300/Mb IP . They all said cogent couldn't possibly survive selling $10/Mb IP. Well, we have IP from AT&T/Level(3)/Telia/Sprint...and Cogent for the past 6 years and they are all about the same in terms of performance and reliability. The only difference is now all of those former high-cost providers are pricing the same or below Cogent's list price. Cogent's bandwidth isn't inferior, and those who said it was are morons. Cogent simply violates the primary relationship between peers being that you have somewhat even traffic flows and don't simply flood other providers while taking very little traffic yourself.
To understand the issues with Cogent you need to work for a ISP or other company that has to deal frequently with peering and traffic loads.
To the average customer Cogent is a amazing deal. You just run the risk of having your site cut completely from the internet by other major peers because you chose to use the assholes of the industry and with the prices and service they offer who could blame you?
--
Forum Posts:7500 |
|
Sean
join:2004-01-23
Ottawa
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Qumahlin
said by Qumahlin :said by UnKown :Cogent's business model is spectacular. Its all about bulk. They have one of the best data networks on the globe. We should see other big tier 1 providers doing the same thing as cogent. It doesn't cost these companies nearly as much as they are charging to run the network. Cogent is just bringing competition to the ball game. I loved how cogent sent letters to level 3 customers who were affected by the disconnect, offering the customers a great discount on their service. I hope they do the same to this swedish company. Cogent's business model is only spectacular if your not a peer having to intake hundreds of TB's of their traffic, while outputting very little of your traffic to their network. It's the equivalent of you splitting the water bill with your roomate 50/50 and then finding out your roommate takes 6 showers a day, owns 9 aquariums, and likes to listen to the sound of running water just because it makes him giggle. Other data providers aren't "jealous" of Cogent's model, they just aren't blatant assholes. If they truly wanted to get into a pricing war with Cogent they easily could and would not need to resort to harming customers on both sides like they do everytime a peering agreement is unexpectedly cut. The point is, running a data network is no longer as expensive as they make you think. If Cogent can do it, then they can too. The only reason Cogent users experience peering problems, is BECAUSE OF THE OTHER ISPs. |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to dogma
7 or 8 years ago, Cogent was decidedly inferior. Their network was relatively unreliable and had significantly higher latency. And htey were unable to keep their peering ratios balanced, hence the issues with regularly being depeered by someone or another.
Now their network is better. Still not as good as some of the better ones, but much nearer the average. And now they're the ones doing the depeering and fucking their single-homed customers. If they really cared about their customers, they would accept TeliaSonera's routes from their transit providers (yes, Cogent has transit, they are not transit-free), rather than purposely filtering them. Of course, TeliaSonera generates and sinks a lot of traffic, so that would drive their costs up. Hmm..sounds like someone who one ought to peer with, doesn't it?
Luckily, most network managers have learned that Cogent only is not OK, because you will eventually get burned if you go that route.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
|
trparky
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
clubs:
·AT&T U-Verse
| I used to work for a web host and did Level 1 and sometimes Level 2 Technical Support and have seen what Cogent provides as "bandwidth". Yeah, most of the bottlenecks that customers saw was because of Cogent.
Now I no longer work for that web host but I do know that they peer with Level(3), AT&T, and Time Warner Telecom.
--
Tom |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to UnKown
Cogent is great. Its the FIOS of the internet, consumer/residential grade internet at reasonable prices. Remember a T3 and FIOS are basically the same, 1 costs $100, the other $10,000, which one would you pick?
Too many ISPs and backbone providers still see $$ signs in their eyes, and price as if its 1975 and Ma Bell is king, and in most cases they are Ma Bell because you have to peer with them to get good speeds and ping to the consumer ISPs behind them. $300 a month for a T1 of bandwidth? Even SDSL is cheaper. |
|
Leem
join:2003-11-01
Glen Rock, NJ
1 edit | reply to wifi4milez
Unfortuntely if the ways things are going, paying extra for a backup will become the norm, especially with the growing rate of users each year, ISPS' just can't keep up with the overall growth, which means for the rest of us who have 'been' here, slowly get shafted and forced into either paying high premiums for A) Faster/more reliable service or B) paying like you said, for a backup service either way, with the sorry state of the economy right now, its not a good feeling or situation to be in. |
|
