Sprint accused of 'partitioning internet'

Back to the article

Sprint - you bunch of morons #

Posted Friday 31st October 2008 21:25 GMT

This has stopped me getting access to all of my servers including email.

I'm about to ditch their Mobile Broadband and switch over to Verizon. This stupidity affects their customers and the only way to make them understand that their customers come first it for us to up and walk away from them.

Daniel B.

Drop down the (Sprint) Donkey #

Posted Friday 31st October 2008 22:48 GMT

If you're a Sprint customer: Vote with your feet.

This has got to be the stupidest decision made by a telco provider. I hope it comes to bite 'em in the ass when droves of subscribers jump the bandwagon because they're no longer able to access their corporate servers, VPN's and such.

I only feel bad for them because they'll bring Nextel down as well.

Oninoshiko

Cogent AGAIN? #

Posted Saturday 1st November 2008 04:31 GMT

As much as you guys may want to be mad as Sprint, this is the third time Cogent has been depeered by a backbone provider. Each time it has been a different provider. So, is it that all the backbone providers are conspiring against poor little Cogent, or is it that Cogent doesn't like to actually carry data for the companies it 'peers' with?

After you have been through enough marriages, maybe its not them...

Rupert Fiennes

Cogent again cont #

Posted Saturday 1st November 2008 14:17 GMT

The agreement between Sprint and Cogent is best described as "settlement based peering" just for everyone's information. The reason for this being an "issue" is that Cogent will not buy "transit" to allow Cogent customers access to Sprint via their networks if Sprint and Cogent do not directly peer, which is a poor customer care frankly

When I buy an IP circuit, I expect access to everywhere...and since I was burnt before when Cogent decided to de-peer Level3 and Telia, I don't use them anymore. I think their attitude in not buying transit is rooted in their belief that they are a Tier1 carrier and shouldn't need to, which is nonsense

James Woods

cogent #

Posted Sunday 2nd November 2008 02:55 GMT

I have to agree with Oninoshiko. There are higher-end service providers that actually market themselves as being "Cogent-Free" and that boosts sales. Cogent isn't seen as a 'cost effective' provider to those in the industry, they are seen as the network that hosts porn, spam, and troublemakers and for the most part that's a fair label. If Cogent can't deal with companies like level3, Sprint, AOL ......... then the problem does appear to be Cogent.

Edward Clarke