October 13, 2005 -- (WEB HOST INDUSTRY REVIEW) -- Unforeseen circumstances, such as a dispute between ISPs, can bring a Web host's network down, creating technical headaches and a legion of unhappy customers. And there is not much a host can do to prevent this from happening.
Last Wednesday morning Level 3 (level3.com) disconnected its network from Cogent (cogentco.com), leaving customers of both companies unable to access their online services and blocked off from certain parts of the Internet. Roughly five percent of Cogent's customers were affected while Level 3 did not comment on any specific numbers.
Like most tier-1 providers Cogent and Level 3 exchange traffic or peer freely, establishing direct connections between their networks and enabling traffic to flow freely over the Internet. Most of the major carriers - AT&T, Sprint, Verizon and MCI - have peering deals with each other. The practice is mutually beneficial when both sides share relatively equal amounts of traffic. But such relationships can become strained or even break down when one side carries a disproportionate burden.
That is what appears to have happened in this particular case. While the two companies have a peering agreement without any compensatory provisions, Level 3 believes the relationship is increasingly unbalanced, with Cogent pushing a load of traffic heavier than the traffic going the other way. And as a result, Level 3 is determined to alter the existing arrangement and possibly charge Cogent for transit.
"Over the last six months, our operating subsidiary has assessed all of our relationships to determine whether or not settlement-free peering is still appropriate," Sureel Choksi, executive vice president of Level 3, said in a statement last Friday. "We determined that the agreement that we had with Cogent was not equitable to Level 3. Following our review, we decided that it was unfair for us to be subsidizing Cogent's business."
Level 3 says it notified Cogent of its intentions as early as July, and again in August - well in advance of the 60-day notice it is obliged to provide. Contact was made with senior Cogent executives in order to discuss an alternative arrangement but those overtures were rebuffed, Choksi says.
Cogent however disputes this claim. The company said only administrative letters were sent out, and only to subsidiary companies it had recently acquired. In fact, Schaeffer says he was not even aware of Level 3's intentions until he received a phone call from the company pressuring Cogent to raise its prices about three weeks ago.
Cogent's CEO Dave Schaeffer believes the move is a direct response to its pricing policies (Cogent carries some of the lowest-cost bandwidth prices in the industry and supplies many Web hosts). "They [Level 3] believe Cogent is selling its services below actual cost, and have tried to pressure us into raising our prices," says Schaeffer, "We have been very resistant to do that."
In a response to the situation Cogent announced last Friday that it would offer a free year of Internet transit (at its current volume) to any Level 3 customer. "That would allow those customers to effectively multi-home to Cogent and therefore not impact them as customers of level 3 and also allow our customers connectivity to those customers," says Schaeffer.
The same day, Level 3, likely feeling pressures from its own customer base, restored Cogent's connection. "Because Internet users, apparently without notice from Cogent and through no fault of their own, have been impacted, Level 3 has, effective immediately, re-established a free connection to Cogent," Choksi said.
Level 3 says the connection, opened "in order to allow Internet users to make alternative arrangements," will be maintained until November 9 at 6:00 pm EST. Level 3 has not stated its intentions but is likely to cut Cogent off again if the two parties do not reach an amicable agreement. Both parties have stated their willingness to engage in negotiations.
The peering spat between tier-1 service providers Level 3 Communications and Cogent Communications served as yet another reminder of how fragile Internet connectivity is, and the fact that upstream issues are out of their hands. Web hosts must do all they can to protect themselves, particularly by ensuring they are multi-homed.
"I think it is very prudent for any customer, whether they be a hoster or any major customer, to have multiple connections," says Schaeffer. "There is no network that is absolutely foolproof so I think it is a good insurance policy."
Level 3 declined to make any additional comments to those in the statement attributed to Choksi last Friday.
