Cogent sales reps who actually respond

• Subject: Cogent sales reps who actually respond
• From: ben at 6by7.net (Ben Cannon)
• Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 18:44:35 -0700
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

â??They also run their links hot which create latency for anything flowing through it.â??

Mike, Iâ??d have agreed with you - 15 years ago. Is this current at all?  My views on Cogent have evolved dramatically over the years.  How recent is your data?

-Ben

> On Sep 16, 2019, at 4:21 PM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The argument has been listed numerous times so i didnâ??t want to bore people:
> 
> 1. Sprint peering battle. Google it
> 2. He.net peering battle. Google it.
> 3. Google IPv6 peering battle. Google it.
> 
> All of which point to them being pompous assholes.
> 
> They also run their links hot which create latency for anything flowing through it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mike
> 
>> On Sep 16, 2019, at 15:59, Stephen M. <stephen.myspam at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Please donâ??t praise or complain like weâ??re supposed to take it at a total face value. If you donâ??t like them so much - we are youâ??re audience. Explain. 
>> 
>> If you like Cogent - explain.
>> If you donâ??t like Cogent - explain.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen
>> 
>> //please pardon any brevities - sent from mobile//
>> 
>>> On Sep 16, 2019, at 10:01 PM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Whenever asked about Cogent, i just say, â??Friends donâ??t let friends use Cogent.â??
>>> 
>>> Iâ??ve told two of their reps over the past two years that even if the service was free, i wouldnâ??t use it. And yet, they still call.
>>> 
>>> -Mike
>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 16, 2019, at 13:53, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> In message <E814E5F6-F386-4AAE-BADA-E423D299A4FB at delong.com>, 
>>>>> Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Given their practice of harvesting whois updates in order to spam newly
>>>>> acquired AS contacts, any time it is my decision, Cogent is ineligible
>>>>> as a vendor.
>>>> 
>>>> So I guess then that their aiding and abetting of fraud and IP block
>>>> theft, as I documented here recently, is an entirely secondary concern...
>>>> as long as they don't spam you, yes?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> rfg

• Follow-Ups:
  • Cogent sales reps who actually respond
    • From: morrowc.lists at gmail.com (Christopher Morrow)
  • Cogent sales reps who actually respond
    • From: mike.lyon at gmail.com (Mike Lyon)

• References:
  • Cogent sales reps who actually respond
    • From: mike.lyon at gmail.com (Mike Lyon)
  • Cogent sales reps who actually respond
    • From: stephen.myspam at gmail.com (Stephen M.)
  • Cogent sales reps who actually respond
    • From: mike.lyon at gmail.com (Mike Lyon)

• Prev by Date: Cogent sales reps who actually respond
• Next by Date: Cogent sales reps who actually respond
• Previous by thread: Cogent sales reps who actually respond
• Next by thread: Cogent sales reps who actually respond
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread