[137673] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: ipv6 transit over tunneled connection
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (-Hammer-)
Thu Feb 17 22:09:34 2011
From: "-Hammer-" <bhmccie@gmail.com>
To: "'Jack Carrozzo'" <jack@crepinc.com>, "'Eric Van Tol'" <eric@atlantech.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim_em6Fs4aLV+6ypDcmztWuhsNZgraptpc+VcmN@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:06:49 -0600
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
AT&T has told us that they will have IPv6 on their MIS circuits Q2 2011. =
Deltacom has told us the same.=20
We will be testing native IPv6 with both these carriers on GE Internet
circuits sometime around Q3.=20
=A0
-Hammer-
=A0
"I was a normal American nerd."
-Jack Herer
=A0
=A0
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Carrozzo [mailto:jack@crepinc.com]=20
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 9:01 PM
To: Eric Van Tol
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: ipv6 transit over tunneled connection
We pick up v6 from HE currently (like the rest of the world). L3 offered =
us
dual stack also, but they wanted money to set it up plus MRC. None of =
our
Bits That Matter (tm) go over v6 anyhow. (I guess the right phrase would =
be
"revenue producing bits").
-Jack Carrozzo
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Eric Van Tol <eric@atlantech.net> =
wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net]
> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 2:49 PM
> > To: Jack Carrozzo
> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Re: ipv6 transit over tunneled connection
> >
> > I'm curious what providers have not gotten their IPv6
> > plans/networks/customer ports enabled.
> >
> > I know that Comcast is doing their trials now (Thanks John!) and =
will be
> > presenting at the upcoming NANOG about their experiences.
> >
> > What parts of the big "I" Internet are not enabled or ready?
> >
>
> We don't see Savvis, Level3, or AboveNet with IPv6 capabilities in our
> region (DC). Two years ago, neither Verizon or AT&T had IPv6, either.
Not
> sure about them now, as we no longer use them for transit. One would
think
> everyone would have v6 capabilities in the heart of government =
territory,
> but okay.
>
> For whatever reason, Verio actually charges (or used to) for their =
IPv6
> separately from IPv4 and to top it all off, it wasn't significantly
> discounted.
>
> -evt
>
>
>
