Sprint's de-peering with Cogent - Thanks for breaking my email, Sprint.

[strat]

So it seems Sprint has decided to escalate its peering war with Cogent (http://tech.slashdot.org/tech/08/10/31/0439245.shtml), and decided not only to de-peer with them (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Sprint-Cogent-in-Peering-Feud-98792?nocomment=1) but to actively announce routes that are preventing Sprint customers from reaching Cogent customers through other transit providers. The upshot of this? Anyone who uses a mail/Internet service on a site connected to Cogent has lost connectivity.

I realize that Cogent doesn't always play nicely with its routing, but this is infuriating for those of us trying to do business. They really need to play more professionally with each other, or at least warn us users that they're about to take actions that will result in losses of connectivity.

I used to sit in the NOC of a tier-1 ISP and I totally understand why Sprint might not want to pass traffic directly to Cogent if they can't negotiate a decent peering agreement. From what I can tell, however, Sprint isn't allowing those of us on Sprint's network to connect even through other transit providers to get to little things like our email if it happens to be hosted on "the wrong" netblocks.

I spoke with a very nice gentleman in Treo tech support. Apparently they're under orders not to open tickets about this, but when I insisted, he did it anyone. I would urge anyone else who can't get to things they need to access to do the same. At least if you have a case number, when the day comes to argue about their self-imposed service interruption, Sprint can't complain that it didn't happen.

Sorry if I'm testy, I had a busy day of meetings and really didn't need this distraction, ESPECIALLY because I came to Sprint from Verizon because of their data services. No discount in the world is worth this.

[sprintsrfr]

I've lost access to several sites over the last day or two. It's infuriating, and inexcusable. Luckily I subscribe to a software VPN service, and when I'm tunneled through that way, my connection pops out half way across the country, and I can then reach the sites that way. Problem is, it's a little slower, and things take longer to load.

[rilharri]

Well it is really not Sprint's fault they are only doing what ANY of US would ..

Sprint is providing a service Cogent is REFUSING to pay for it...

Call Cogent....
They do this all the time its sad, but be happy you are not in Europe when they did it WOW

[strat]

Thanks. I have been considering doing just that. For the laptop that will be easy. For the Treo,it's a lot more challenging. Decent VPN (especially IPSEC) clients are difficult to find. I suppose if it's for access and not security even PPTP would do.
Well, I know for what I'll be searching tonight.

Traditionally, these standoffs last about 3 days and the network whose users howl the loudest should blink first.

It's actually a fascinating phenomenon to observe, and reminds me of a friend's comment that "nations exist with respect to each other in a state of anarchy."

So too,it seems, it is with ISPs.

I just wish they would let me read my mail. I never was much of a fan of conscription to fight other people's battles.

[strat]

Well it is really not Sprint's fault they are only doing what ANY of US would ..

Sprint is providing a service Cogent is REFUSING to pay for it...

Call Cogent....
...


In fairness, that is an oversimplification and ignores the basic realities of network peering. When any network gets to a certain size, there's a point where being able to reach their customers is as important to your users as being able to reach anyone else's.

I don't think this is necessarily the best venue for protracted discussions of peering policy, but I do think that as a matter of customer service, Sprint could be handling things better, simply by changing route preferences, and having some consideration for the fact that we users who may even sympathize with their desire for a last-ditch effort to extract settlements from Cogent are being impacted by Sprint's intentional denial of service to us.

For the record, it's not at all clear that Cogent is a paid peer to most other tier 1's anymore. The legacy tier 1's are still miffed that bandwidth pricing dropped from $100 to $6, largely due to Cogent's businesss model. That's the glory of free enterprise.

When I last built out an office that happened to be on-net with Cogent, at $900/month for flat-rate 100/mb/s service, you bet I jumped on it.

I also made preparations for a backup connection.

[winger]

Thanks Strat for the heads up. This explains my post "DNS change in California" in this same forum. I also cannot 'easily' access my email, though I can other ways

[strat]

It appears at as of 1700 Eastern, Sprint's and Cogent's networks are passing traffic to each other again. Film at 11.

[sprintsrfr]

After 4 rounds of back-and-forth from Sprint tech "support", whereby I received canned responses that never addressed my complaint, I just received this:

Dear XXXXXX,

Thank you for contacting Sprint. I apologize for any inconvenience
caused due to disconnecting connection with cogent.

Sprint recently ended an Internet Protocol (IP) peering trial with
Cogent. Cogent did not meet Sprint?s terms of the trial and Sprint
disconnected its peering connections with Cogent. The disconnection may
cause customers to report a change in routing behaviors on the Sprint
wireless data network.

Once all interconnections between Sprint and Cogent are disconnected,
Sprint customers who are trying to reach content that is supported by a
single-homed Cogent customer (a Cogent customer's only access to the
Internet is through their Cogent connection) are no longer able to
access that content. Customers should have no problem accessing major
Web sites, such as Google, Yahoo, or CNN. Second tier Web sites hosted
on the Cogent network may not be accessible.

We are currently unable to assist in this situation but hope to have a
fix in the near future. In the meanwhile you can access the needed Web
sites through a landline connection. Unfortunately, at this time you
will not be able to access the restricted sites. The only way to access
these sites at this time would be through a standard IP connection that
has access to these sites.

We are again sorry for the inconvenience this may have caused.

Thank you again for contacting Sprint. We appreciate your business.

Sincerely,
XXXXXX
Customer Service Specialist
Sprint

[sprintsrfr]

SPRINT-NEXTEL SEVERS ITS INTERNET CONNECTION TO COGENT COMMUNICATIONS
WASHINGTON, D.C. October 30, 2008

On October 30 at 4:30 pm Sprint-Nextel severed its Internet connection to Cogent thereby partitioning the Internet. It is no longer possible for many Sprint customers and Cogent customers to directly communicate across the Internet. Sprint did so in violation of a contractual obligation to exchange Internet traffic with Cogent on a settlement free peering basis. Sprint and Cogent are engaged in litigation over this matter. Cogent regrets that Sprint chose to take this unilateral action rather than await a determination by the court as to the rights of the parties. Cogent remains ready to reestablish, on the same settlement free basis as previously existed, the connections that Sprint has severed.

In the over 1300 on-net locations worldwide where Cogent provides service, Cogent is offering every Sprint-Nextel wireline customer that is unable to connect to Cogent’s customers a free 100 megabit per second connection to the Internet for as long as Sprint continues to keep this partitioning of the Internet in place. Unfortunately, there is no way that Cogent can do the same for the wireless customers of Sprint-Nextel.

All other major wireless carriers have full connectivity to Cogent and are unaffected by this event.

[winger]

I can confirm I can now read/access emails from my email provider (over on cogent's side).

LOL I was a bit upset and was composing an email to my two US State Senators from California to take action, both happen to be from San Francisco areas where I live.

[rilharri]

SPRINT STATEMENT TO CUSTOMERS ON ITS DEPEERING WITH COGENT COMMUNICATIONS



Dear Valued Customers,



On Thursday, October 30th, Sprint Nextel completed a disconnection of its network from Cogent Communications. This action was taken by Sprint after Cogent breached its contract and failed to pay for its ongoing connection to the Sprint network, despite repeated collections attempts by Sprint.



Until this issue is resolved, Sprint will continue to work tirelessly to the extent within our control to mitigate the effects on customers. As part of an interim solution, Sprint initiated a temporary reconnection to the Cogent network on Sunday, November 2nd so that customers would have temporary access while longer-term alternate and permanent access options are explored.



We emphasize that this reconnection is temporary only, as the core issues in this dispute have not changed. Cogent was notified in advance of the November 2nd reconnection; therefore, any access disruptions occurring during this temporary period are the sole result of a negative reaction instigated by Cogent against the customers of both parties.



Sprint deeply regrets any inconvenience caused by this issue and we do not take our actions lightly given frustrations experienced by customers of both parties.



Background



In 2006, Cogent sought a peering trial agreement in the hopes that it would lead to settlement-free peering status with Sprint. Settlement-free peering is a contractual relationship in which two companies exchange Internet traffic without charging each other. This arrangement is only fair if the two parties exchange roughly equal volumes of traffic across the two networks. Prior to this trial period, Cogent utilized third parties for full Internet connectivity.



Following a three-month commercial trial agreement during June - September 2007, the peering trial data indicated that Cogent did not meet the minimum traffic exchange criteria agreed to by both parties. As a result, settlement-free peering was not established and Cogent was notified in writing of these results. Despite this fact, and after repeated discussions, Cogent failed to disconnect itself from the Sprint network or compensate Sprint for the ongoing connection.



Sprint has repeatedly notified Cogent in writing of payment past due and our intent to take action if the issue was left unresolved. On September 2nd of this year, Sprint filed a lawsuit against Cogent for breach of contract. Sprint also notified Cogent in writing of our intent to begin disconnect procedures if Cogent did not pay for services or voluntarily disconnect and make arrangements with one of many alternate providers. Throughout this period, which includes the initial disconnect activities, Cogent did nothing to mitigate the potential effects of Sprint's pending disconnect to its customers.



Fact and Fiction



On October 30th, Cogent issued a press release and has made subsequent statements to the media that contain a number of distortions regarding the relationship between Sprint and Cogent. The following is intended to clarify these misstatements:



Cogent press release: "On October 30 at 4:30 pm Sprint-Nextel severed its Internet connection to Cogent thereby partitioning the Internet."



FACT: The events of October 30th related only to disconnection of the final two interconnects (of 10 original interconnections) between Sprint and Cogent. In addition to notifying Cogent 30 days in advance of our intent to disconnect, Sprint's first disconnect action took place on October 7th, 2008. Between October 7th and October 30th, Sprint disconnected one or two ports each week with Cogent's full awareness. During this period, Cogent failed to take any action in support of its own customers' ongoing Internet reachability even though such actions were fully under its control.



Cogent press release: "Sprint [severed its Internet connection to Cogent] in violation of a contractual obligation to exchange traffic with Cogent on a settlement free peering basis."



FACT: At no time did Sprint and Cogent enter into a contract for settlement free peering. In 2006, Sprint and Cogent formed a commercial trial agreement that ended in September 2007. Cogent was unable to satisfy the agreed-upon traffic exchange criteria within the trial agreement, yet refused to pay Sprint or disconnect from Sprint's network.



Cogent press release: "Sprint and Cogent are engaged in litigation over this matter. Cogent regrets that Sprint chose to take this unilateral action rather than await a determination by the court as to the rights of the parties."



FACT: Sprint filed a lawsuit on September 2nd in Fairfax County, VA Circuit Court against Cogent for breach of contract due to Cogent's refusal to pay Sprint for the ongoing connection to our network. Sprint also provided Cogent with 30 days advance written notice in the hope that Cogent would take action to mitigate the impact of this action on our respective customers.



Cogent press release: "Cogent remains ready to reestablish, on the same settlement free basis as previously existed, the connections that Sprint has severed."



FACT: As noted above, Sprint and Cogent did not enter into a settlement free peering agreement. Instead, the two companies entered into a commercial trial agreement, upon which Cogent did not meet the minimum traffic exchange criteria agreed to by both parties.

[brklyn]

Either way, the link is back up now

You can check http://www.internetpulse.net/ in the future, this morning Sprint to Cogent was like 3% availability instead of the 99-100 it is now