Anyone else seen terrible support and high turnover of sales/account people at Cogent the last few months? Is there something going on over there internally? I’m sure some people will say Cogent has always been crap but in the past their account reps and support were pretty good. It seems to have gone downhill the last 12 months really bad.
Regards,
Ryan
I am glad I’m not the only one. I’ve noticed similar. Just when I get used to one rep it seems I have a new one.
I think I noticed this actually start a bit longer than that. Around the time they started charging for BGP sessions and IP blocks on existing customers. So at least a year but I think closer to two years ago.
Have had the same sales rep for several years now; unfortunately he has no ability to fix their IPv6 peering issue so we’re slowly removing circuits, but otherwise for a handful of 10gig DIA circuits it’s been stable.
That’s ALWAYS been my experience with Cogent.
cue e-mail from Cogent rep
Have had the same sales rep for several years now; unfortunately he has no ability to fix their IPv6 peering issue so we’re slowly removing circuits, but otherwise for a handful of 10gig DIA circuits it’s been stable.
Yep, this. Whenever Cogent calls, this is what i tell them. Black-holing HE and Google ipv6 traffic, which is what they do if i use a default route from them, is dead on arrival. Shows they make bad decisions and dont put the customer first, or even create such an illusion.
They call me every few months. the last time they emailed me I said I wasn’t interested because of the HE issue. I have yet to get another email…
When I call and mention it I’m told that it’s HE’s fault (despite the lovely cake), but when I also bring Google, then they tell me to get a different provider just for this traffic, or meet them at an IX and send my traffic from there.
About the staff rotation I’ve seen it too, and I’ve also seen an increase in salespeople calling, for example when an AS is registered etc. in addition to the normal calls…
I don’t really get the Cogent/Google peering issues. I’ve been hearing this for years… How about fixing it already? Telling customer to get other transit providers to get to a given network is really bad.
On a side note, HE is still HE but they’re trying really hard to be a good netcitizen. They’ve finally pushed filtering for peers: http://routing.he.net. I wouldn’t get transit from them, but in some markets, they’re the only affordable IP transit providers.
We have been very happy with HE. It was a no brainer over cogent. They are smaller (so are we). When there are issues they are real fast to fix them, you also get the personal touch which you don’t get with others.
HE is happy to peer with Cogent and would love to solve this issue.
Thanks
Walt
I’m in the process of turning up a Cogent circuit in Cologix (Columbus) and hope to be finished in the next week or so. So far my experience has been great.
The only thing I didn’t like was the monthly sales call asking me to sign the contract, reminding me they are available.
As someone who really depends upon full internet access I can’t purchase from either supplier due to this. This mirrors what Ca By said, need a place where there’s full reachability.
I would factor that into your purchases/network design.
You can design around this, but it also may be too much effort.
- Jared
Yeah google is the issue for us. We provide web services and a LOT of our customers have software that is making calls of various types to Google services, or even just email delivery to Google hosted email; if all but a Cogent transit link to a given data center were down, all of those customers’ sites would begin failing at some level because the servers generally try v6 if the application level wasn’t explicit. Cogent doesn’t seem to care since their CEO is in some pissing match with Google. They must be deriving enough revenue from last mile v4-only turn ups that they don’t really care about dual stack customers.
That being said, can’t say I’ve been impressed with their MPLS / metroE offerings either. When doing the pricing/sizing routine on a project, I learned that they have an internal concept of src-dst flows on those types of circuits, and if they can’t see your labels, or otherwise hash the traffic, or it all truly is point to point, you may not get the full bandwidth, or may need to buy a capacity larger than what the flow will be.
Yeah google is the issue for us. We provide web services and a LOT of our customers have software that is making calls of various types to Google services, or even just email delivery to Google hosted email; if all but a Cogent transit link to a given data center were down, all of those customers’ sites would begin failing at some level because the servers generally try v6 if the application level wasn’t explicit. Cogent doesn’t seem to care since their CEO is in some pissing match with Google. They must be deriving enough revenue from last mile v4-only turn ups that they don’t really care about dual stack customers.
That being said, can’t say I’ve been impressed with their MPLS / metroE offerings either. When doing the pricing/sizing routine on a project, I learned that they have an internal concept of src-dst flows on those types of circuits, and if they can’t see your labels, or otherwise hash the traffic, or it all truly is point to point, you may not get the full bandwidth, or may need to buy a capacity larger than what the flow will be.
Cogent have more pain points on average but they’re still the best option for getting to other Cogent customers. It’s not really hard to design around their shortcomings. I’d rather have 30 small links and be well-connected than two large ones and be SOL because someone refuses to peer.
I can’t speak to their MPLS service, because cogent’s the last company I’d ever trust with my backbone.
Agreed. A couple IXes, Cogent, HE, and a couple others. Add more IXes and others as needed. Eyeballs should be fine with the above.
As an eyeball network operator, Cogent has served me well for several years, I can say that they are probably the easiest and most relaxed and most accessible to work with from my experience compared to my other providers, I’m comparing to 3 other well-known providers
It seems like when I call Cogent the person that answers the phone is the person that solves my problem, other providers I have to go through multiple layers of people to get to someone who knows how to do what I need them to do
Cogent has typically been the cheapest also
However Cogent seems to be the dirtiest in regards to DDOS… however Telia might be catching up… in times past when I receive volumetric DDOS, Cogent typically ranks with the highest on my providers … AT&T and spectrum seem to be a bit cleaner
I also have the long-standing v6 google issue
So yeah, pros and cons, but that’s true about most things, pros and cons
Aaron
Speaking of Cogent service (and I know you guys are watching), I'd love
to get someone's help off-list turning up a p2p that has been moved to
billing despite being told loud and clear it doesn't work. I
half-expected it to not work when I found out there was a type 2
provider involved, but I definitely did not expect to be billed for
it...
-Matt
Oh how funny I’m working on a billing issue with them for a circuit they turned up but didn’t connect to the MMR for 2 months...
-Ben