NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
NNSquad Home Page
[ NNSquad ] Re: Peering dispute cuts off Sprint<->Cogent Internet traffic
Yes, ISPs are always multihomed, but multihomed does not mean multi-routed for every single route path. That’s why whenever you get one of these disputes, certain routes are cut off until the dispute is resolved. When you use application proxies (or DNS remapping) to re-route, you’re simply working around the broken IP link but the link is still broken.
I use to administrate a network where we acted as a smaller ISP. When we had BGP routes flap between two separate uplinks, it could take several minutes or even an hour to come back up.
There's no violation of any RFCs here, it's a peering dispute which is quite
common on the Internet.
It's a long running myth that routes are automatically rerouted on the
Internet. Unless one of the two end-points is dual-homed with 2 completely
separate ISPs configured for BGP (or DNS remapping), any break in the route
means a disconnection between the two points. Even when BGP does exist, it
takes some time for the routes to propagate so there's always some outage
for a period of time when there's a break in the link.
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 1:38 PM
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: Peering dispute cuts off Sprint<->Cogent Internet
From: Ed Jankiewicz <email@example.com>
Subject: Total Filtering
As many news organizations are now reporting, Sprint-Nextel (Embarq) hasdecided to sever its Internet connection with Cogent, another Internetservice provider. This action has caused a "hole" or "rip" in theinternet, meaning that Sprint-Nextel (Embarq) and Cogent customers mayfind they cannot access resources hosted by the other company'scustomers. Similar standoffs have occurred in the past, and usually onecompany backs down after a few days, but no one can predict what willhappen in this case.
OK, so what has happened to the "treats censorship as damage and routes
around it" Internet? Even if Embarq and Cogent are no longer talking to
each other, the routers should be automatically finding routes via other
carriers and sending the packets -- around Robin Hood's barn if
necessary, but the Internet is supposed to be _robust_. Jon Postel
designed it that way -- I've read the RFCs. That's what ARPA specified
when they paid for the development of first the ARPANet and later the
Internet -- and what NSF paid for when they branched off NSFNet and
allowed commercial traffic.
Are these guys programming their routers to just drop packets with
certain destination IP addresses, instead of finding the shortest
I'm beginning to think that Congress (or perhaps an international body
similar to the WTO) should make the core RFCs (IP, TCP, BGP, FTP, HTTP,
SMTP, and RFC 822) have the force of law. And anybody who violates
those protocols should be fined and/or have their connections turned off.
StormTide Digital Studios Inc.
Author of the recently published book, "Pro PHP"