Comments on: Cogent = Bad choice

By: bob

bob — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 01:22:33 +0000

We use XO for a dedicated line between our office and the data center. It took damn near forever to get it lit and cross-connected correctly but since then it’s been working great (and it’s actually a bit faster than the 10mbit we’re paying for).

When I asked XO for a quote for data their prices were high (relative to e.g. internap) and it took them two or three days to get back to me. Internap I had a good experience with, the sales guy emailed me a quote within an hour or two, I didn’t even have to talk to anyone on the phone.

By: Jeffrey

Jeffrey — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:05:46 +0000

We use XO communications for both telecom/VoIP and data. I have worked with them directly and have had good experiences with both their sales team and their support folks.

By: Jason Watkins

Jason Watkins — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:13:22 +0000

This is not the first or 2nd time cogent has gotten itself in such a situation…

Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_carrier and http://as-rank.caida.org/ for some metrics you could use to estimate peering performance in a handwaving way. You could also parse your access logs for samples to trace and see if one carrier fits your users better.

About a year ago I talked to basically all of them, I found level 3 the most pleasant to deal with, and their rate was surprisingly competitive. Accel might have a relationship with a carrier that would get you a more favorable deal.

By: zimbatm

zimbatm — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:16:42 +0000

Heh, I have seen lots of web hosting services having “No Cogent” in their feature list. From one of those sites : “The outgoing bandwidth is a full BGP mix of Savvis, XO, PCCW Global, Telia, GameRail, and local peering (no Cogent)”. Hope that helps !