In late October, Cogent had yet another in a long history of peering feuds, this time with Sprint, who accused the company of failing to pay and shirking contractual obligations. This was after Cogent issued a press release blaming Sprint. Forbes now has a good piece online exploring the fight in more detail, saying the two companies were both engaged in a "year long game of chicken," that resulted in millions of people being disconnected from the Internet.

According to the report, the feud began back in 2002, when Cogent asked Sprint (to which they were connected via a third party) to directly connect in order to exchange Internet traffic at no charge to either party. Sprint refused, saying they'd accept a direct connection, but only if Cogent paid. The two sides argued to a standstill until 2006, when Sprint contractually agreed to a 90-day equal transfer trial, to test if traffic exchange would be roughly equal.

Days after the trial completed in 2007, Sprint proclaimed at Cogent failed the test, despite the two carriers sending equal amounts of bandwidth. According to Forbes, Sprint claims the deal "hadn't carried enough traffic under the terms of the contract as determined by the contract." While the two companies fought, Sprint began sending bills to Cogent, which Cogent refused to pay. In July '08, with $1.2 million in bills piled up, Sprint decided to sue. Cogent insists Sprint never intended to honor the equal swap idea:After a counter-suit by Cogent, which said Sprint was free to disconnect the 10 links between the two companies, that's exactly what Sprint started doing, severing the last connection on October 30. By Sunday, Nov. 2, the company had changed its mind and reconnected, apparently made aware by throngs of angry customers that they'd made the wrong decision. And that's how Internet connectivity black holes are born, kids.