[132239] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jon Auer)
Thu Nov 18 17:35:56 2010
In-Reply-To: <68407834$b3a35c5$5c90f34c$@com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:35:51 -0600
From: Jon Auer <jda@tapodi.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Good to know about TWT, and yes, I know that TWT !=3D TWC...
Figured it was a good datapoint considering the concurrent discussion
of providers charging for v6...
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Nick Olsen <nick@flhsi.com> wrote:
>
> TW Telecom, Not Time Warner Cable. And TW Telecom already told me it was =
a simple change order with a NRC of 25.00
> Haven't talked to cogent about it yet.
>
> Nick Olsen
> Network Operations
> (855) FLSPEED=C2=A0 x106
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Jon Auer" <jda@tapodi.net>
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 5:19 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6
>
> Technically it was a non-event.
> Layer 8 wise, they refused to turn up IPv6 without a renewal or new order=
.
>
> Time Warner Cable is demanding a new order and additional costs to suppor=
t V6.
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Nick Olsen <nick@flhsi.com> wrote:
> > Curious as to who is running IPv6 with TW Telecom or Cogent.
> > I'm wanting to turn up native IPv6 with them, And wanted to hear
> > thoughts/experiences.
> > I assume it should be a "non-event". We've already got a prefix from ar=
in
> > that we are going to announce.
> >
> > Nick Olsen
> > Network Operations
> > (855) FLSPEED =C2=A0x106
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
