[142620] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Why is IPv6 broken?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Hill)
Mon Jul 11 03:25:54 2011
From: Tom Hill <tom@ninjabadger.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 08:25:12 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAPWAtbK4RsZphj=TdsZ9CvJTEMB26VQmdQxKvtTxP670mhJx5A@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 10:14 -0400, Jeff Wheeler wrote:
> Cogent's policy of requiring a new contract, and from what I am still
> being told by some European customers, new money, from customers in
> exchange for provisioning IPv6 on existing circuits, means a simple
> technical project gets caught up in the complexities of budgeting and
> contract execution.
"Can we have IPv6 transit?"
"Yes, please turn up a session to.."
That was asking Cogent for IPv6 dual-stack on our existing IPv4
transit.
I'm not saying it's any good, but it certainly didn't cost extra.
Tom
