The only issue I saw with bgp.he.net is that it updates after 24hrs which
makes it hard to use for any recently made changes. But for rest works
pretty good.
+1 for Cogent in the mix 
People with a clue in their NOC, near zero routing issues in last 1,5 years.
As previously mentioned, if you would like better representation in bgp.he.net, you can provide a feed to RIPE RIS or Routeviews, as this is where we get our data. If an adjacency is visible here, it is reported. We do not report false adjacencies. If you have a specific question about an adjacency, email me and I will provide the exact route with the AS path demonstrating the adjacency.
We have cogent in the mix, and I do have to say one gets what one pays for... They are a no redundancy, no extra capacity kind of shop... This often is noticeable when they have fiber cuts or equipment failures, it also results in a lot more service affecting maintenance than our other providers.
That being said, we have several 10Gs to them as one of our five upstreams, we mostly use them for on-net traffic and a couple of selected peers where they seem not to have congestion issues. My biggest bone to pick with them though is their incredibly crappy BGP community offering. They have no selective (ie per peer) announcement control options which severely limits our ability to use them more since we end up sending their "perpend to [all] peers" community instead of just prepending to the peers we don't like the return routes on.
Thanks,
John @ AS11404
last time i checked .75 x 1000 = 750
You're using Verizon Math. 
(If you don't know what this is, go Google it!)
"0.75 cents" is not "0.75 dollars". "point 75 cents" == $0.0075. $0.0075 * 1000 = $7.50
- Peter
dam, i think this got more replies then the original thread in 10 minutes.
lol
.75 dollars times 1000 = $750, yes.
But that's not what was written. *That* was .75 cents, which, yes,
comes out to $7.50/gbps.
Cheers,
-- jr 'and please don't make me fix your quoting' a
> From: "A. Pishdadi" <apishdadi@gmail.com>
>
> > > No way they stack up against level3 or any of the other 4 big tier
> > > 1s
> > > but if you throw them in a blend with level3 there shouldn't be
> > > any
> > > issue and I wouldn't pay more the .75 cents a meg for a gig
> >
> > That's $7.50 per 1000mbps. Sign me up!> last time i checked .75 x 1000 = 750
.75 dollars times 1000 = $750, yes.
But that's not what was written. *That* was .75 cents, which, yes,
comes out to $7.50/gbps.
Reminds me of the infamous "Verizon Math":
Derrick
Cogent is really better suited as a tertiary provider.
Not a bad option, but you don't want to lose redundancy when they get
involved in their peering dispute or de-peering du jour.
I'll agree with that; if you have less than 3 upstreams; Cogent sounds risky
for that very reason. If you have at least 3 upstreams for your network,
and you make sure they don't share common modes of failure, such as
the same fiber, then Cogents' service may be a suitable choice for one of those.
If you are serious about network availability, triple redundancy is the bare
minimum anyways, because there are lots of bad things that can happen
to an upstream network or their cabling that may take 24+ hours to repair,
during which time a single SFP failure, router maintenance on the
remaining upstream, or lots of other smaller more common equipment
glitches may incur total outage, before there is any real chance
to recover redundancy.
Least cost options of achieving triple and quad-redundancy are attractive
Ameen Pishdadi wrote:
A Kia and Ferrari can both get me from point a to point b, but the Ferrari is capable of getting me there way quicker, and yes I'm going to pay a premium for it but if I'm going from NYC to San Fran I'd definitely feel safer in the Ferrari reliability wise and get there a hell of a lot quicker...
That's a really flawed comparison, as often is the case when using car analogies (amongst others).
A kia is much safer to drive, more economical and it is much more reliable than a ferrari. The ferrari may get you there quicker, if you didn't kill yourself along the way, or you got pulled over or if the car didn't break down (or all of the above).
So for a better price you have more reliability, more safety and better fuel economy. The ferrari is just for added show off, of some imaginary potential you will never reach.
If you insist on lame analogies, then you can compare a ferrari with a network provider who over commits its bandwidth and is continually over utilised. There is a promise of great speed, but you won't ever get it unless you try at 3 AM at night when traffic is lowest.
Have fun 
I liked Cogent when we had them years ago but due to routing instability
(off the charts) and unplanned down time every single month we dropped
them..... they call me every 3-6 months (different person each time) and I
tell them to go away....
Paul
You know, if you're in the U.S., on the No Call list, and you tell
them specifically not to call you again, they're doing something
illegal and can be fined up to $16,000 dollars for it. Though I hear
that the FTC doesn't actually enforce it too well. May want to try
waving the stick at them at least.
While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the
do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business
to business solicitations.
"The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal
wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a
business number, your registration will not make telephone
solicitations to that number unlawful."
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls
While there may be other grounds for telling them not to call you, the
do not call list is not one of them as it does not apply to business
to business solicitations."The national Do-Not-Call list protects home voice or personal
wireless phone numbers only. While you may be able to register a
business number, your registration will not make telephone
solicitations to that number unlawful."
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-telephone-marketing-calls
Also, (from http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/do-not-call-list )
The Do-Not-Call registry does not prevent all unwanted calls. It does
not cover the following:
calls from organizations with which you have established a
business relationship;
And, in this case, there is a previously established business relationship.
Regards
Marshall
"Because of limitations in the jurisdiction of the FTC and FCC, calls
from or on behalf of political organizations, charities, and telephone
surveyors would still be permitted, as would calls from companies with
which you have an existing business relationship, or those to whom
you’ve provided express agreement in writing to receive their calls.
However, if you ask a company with which you have an existing business
relationship to place your number on its own do-not-call list, it must
honor your request." [1]
Which seems to suggest to me, if you tell them to not call you again,
they need to stop.
However, I was not aware of the complications of using a business
number instead of a personal number.
[1] http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt107.shtm
a) The "previously established business relationship" exemption expires 6
months after the 'business relationship' ends. (This is in the 'fine
print' of the actual rules0 As the relationship in question ended
several years ago, according to the prior poster, this exemption would
not apply.
b) Nothing in the Do-not-call rules applies to calls to business numbers.
Callers to business numbers are not even required to respect a 'put me
on your "do-not-call" list', or 'do not call me again' request under
the DNC rules.
So the moral of the story is to make sure you always make your Cogent
calls from your home phone?
I suspect you could just sue them for harassment if they fail to
honour a request to stop calling you.
do-not-call lists cover home phones, in part, as governments, world
wide, recognise that individuals are not in the position to sue
every company that fails to honour requests to cease and desist.
Company to company battles are more even and many companies have a
existing relationship with lawyers as it is needed for other reasons.
There are laws in most countries that will stop this harassment.
You just need to pick the right one for the circumstances.
Mark