Cogent and L3 had _no_ interconnectivity besides the direct peering relationship. L3 knew it, Cogent knew it. L3 made a decision to sever that direct relationship, and bifurcation ensued. This was not only not a surprised, it was expected. Whether Cogent is a "tier one" or not is irrelevant to the decision, and the resulting effects.

I suspect that the consumer definition of "Tier 1" is something like "provides good connectivity to the entire Internet". By this definition, L3 and Cogent are not currently tier 1 providers. The consumers that I had in mind are the VP finance types who approve the spend on Internet services. A few years ago you could probably bamboozle them about your secret sauce containing "transit free", "peering", "x exchange points" and so on. Today I suspect they are less susceptible to that kind of story and more likely to rely on the experience of existing customers. And if the existing customers of L3 and Cogent are experiencing agony, what kind of marketing story does that tell? --Michael Dillon