[112956] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: First steps towards v6 support by ATT?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Thu Mar 26 21:18:33 2009
In-Reply-To: <49CC24E2.8020303@thewybles.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:13:26 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Charles Wyble <charles@thewybles.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Charles Wyble <charles@thewybles.com> wrot=
e:
>
>
> Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Charles Wyble <charles@thewybles.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> While researching at&t and ipv6 I came across
>>> http://www.feise.com/~jfeise/blogs/index.php?blog=3D8 and also
>>
>> doesn't that blog basically say: "it's broke Jim..." and that 7018
>> (really 7132) passes off the anycast into HE.net?
>
>
> Yes. It does say it's broken. However it's entirely possible that AT&T ha=
nds
> out different routes to their l33t enterprise/govt customers with t1 or
> better who pay real money, vs end users.
>
yea... maybe they do, I don't see that from my view of 7018's routing
data (limited as it may be)
>
>>
>>> http://www.corp.att.com/gov/solution/network_services/data_nw/ipv6/
>>>
>>> Looks like they have established a tunnel in the United States perhaps?
>>>
>>
>> how did you gather that? Maybe Tom knows more about this and can let
>> us all know?
>
> From:
>
> Remote Access Service to IPv6 Internet
>
> =A0 =A0* Support IPv6 for small (or satellite) locations and individual r=
emote
> users
> =A0 =A0* Reach a dynamically configurable IPv6 Tunnel Gateway through IPv=
4 ISPs
> through fractional T1, DSL or dial-up access
> =A0 =A0* The Tunnel Setup Protocol (TSP) will be used to create tunnels t=
o
> transport IPv6 traffic over an IPv4 network to the gateway
>
wow, 'tsp'... uhm, what's that I wonder? This:
http://www.broker.ipv6.ac.uk/download.html
perhaps?? yeek!
> Granted that doesn't necessarily mean it's in the United States, but I'm
> guessing it would be due to being an offering targeted at the United Stat=
es
> Government. :)
Sure... I'd love to know though :)
>
> Hence my request for more comments/information.
>
agreed
> Maybe off topic for NANOG but then what does that even mean anymore? :)
I'm fairly sure that operating a network (even a v6 network) is
on-topic for nanog.
