> They've recently slashed their prices to even more absurdly
> low new levels, and are actively targetting their peers'
> customers, particularly in Europe. Anyone who didn't expect
> to see exactly this kind of fallout as a result really hasn't
> been paying attention.
Well considering the market isn't growing as much as it used to the
only way to grow is to take business away from other people. If
OT can't deal with that on the street then they should close up
shop and go sell kites or something.
They should certainly do something about it any rate rather, instead of
stick their heads in the sand and hope it all goes away. Depeering Cogent
is doing something.
Clearly Cogent are doing something that gives them a cost advantage
otherwise they wouldn't be able to sustain this, so rather than compete
Yes, its called losing money hand over fist. As long as people keep giving
you more it makes it very easy to keep doing what you are doing.
with Cogent, FT try to fiddle with Cogent's costs. If I was an FT
customer and I'd seen this signal I'd be phoning Cogent now for a
quote.
You're missing the big picture. FT depeering Cogent increases costs for
both sides, in fact probably more so for FT than Cogent. This has nothing
to do with cost, and everything to do with FT believing that giving Cogent
access to its customers for free is enabling Cogent to continue selling
services below market rate, disrupting business for everyone. They may be
right. Certainly if everyone took the same position, Cogent would be
unable to continue to operate as it does now, so there is some truth to
that belief.
Despite what some people may think, peering is not a god given right that
you are in any way entitled to receive. Two networks peer when they feel
that there is mutual benefit, not before and not after. You may not agree
with the other network's decision not to peer with you (and in many cases
they me be wrong, and simply don't understand the benefits that are
there), but it is their decision to make.
If Cogent cared about connectivity to FT's customers, it would man up and
pay for the transit to reach them. However, Cogent cares more about the
long-term benefits of settlement free transit than it does about the short
term benefits of being able to reach FT's customers today, so they choose
not to pay for the transit in the hopes that FT will blink. Not that there
is anything wrong with that, but that is the cold hard reality of the
decision that they have made. It might even be the right decision. If you
don't like it, no one is putting a gun to your head and making you buy
Cogent (or FT) transit.
No, it won't change anything - other than for a short period of
time customers will suffer, wouldn't it be nice if we remembered
about the customers.
If you don't like it, buy from someone else. If you sell transit, now is
an excellent time to pick up disgruntled customers from both sides. Either
side could end the lack of connectivity if they wanted, yet they both
clearly see business reasons not to do so.
