[124537] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: New Linksys CPE, IPv6 ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mans Nilsson)
Fri Apr 2 00:33:30 2010
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 06:32:54 +0200
From: Mans Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
To: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: <20100401.233532.74740368.sthaug@nethelp.no>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: New Linksys CPE, IPv6 ? Date: Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 11:35:32PM =
+0200 Quoting sthaug@nethelp.no (sthaug@nethelp.no):
> > What I heard at a recent (within the past six months) conference was
> > that "there is no customer demand for v6" so it isn't on the immediate
> > needs list. He said they had a lot of inquiries about v6, but to date
> > not having native v6 wasn't a deal breaker with anyone.
>=20
> Last time we renegotiated transit contracts, we specified IPv6 as an
> absolute requirement. *Native* IPv6 was an added plus.
We went further and required native. At 10GE interconnect speed, one is
in the recently-upgraded core or metro access layer of most providers.
These parts of the network have been ready (if not set up) for v6 for
at least 5 years now. Did not pose a problem. All I need to do now is=20
to set up the peering ;-)=20
Had I been looking for a FE transit I'd had much more issues with v6
connectivity.
--=20
M=C3=A5ns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE +46 705 989668
INSIDE, I have the same personality disorder as LUCY RICARDO!!
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (SunOS)
iEYEARECAAYFAku1c3UACgkQ02/pMZDM1cVmyQCdHTfd7heODw3D5boadPvsc0ao
ZVgAn2os8fN62ZkGJlNLk0h/da5Tf6ev
=fbfC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5--
