[166442] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Cogent 100M DIA in Denver
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric C. Miller)
Thu Oct 24 22:30:42 2013
From: "Eric C. Miller" <eric@ericheather.com>
To: Robert Glover <robertg@garlic.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 02:30:27 +0000
In-Reply-To: <525C55BB.9020500@garlic.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I'm in the middle of converting IPV4 to dualstack with Cogent. I was told t=
hat they don't have IPV6 in the edge in Tampa yet, so they are VLANing us t=
o a core device to give us v6. So by dualstack, they must mean dualstack on=
ly from an OSI Layer 1 approach. Heartburn city.....
Robert, do you have any advice from working with their ipv6 stuff, yet?
Eric Miller, CCNP
Network Engineering Consultant
(407) 257-5115
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Glover [mailto:robertg@garlic.com]=20
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 4:36 PM
To: tritran@cox.net
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: Cogent 100M DIA in Denver
We've had them since May 2008. Recently upgraded from 100Mb to 250Mb.=20
Had minor issues here and there (no outages to speak of).
I've had some IPv6 issues since moving the link to dual-stack a few months =
back, but we are not deploying IPv6 to end-users yet, so I'll let them slid=
e on that.
On 10/14/2013 12:57 PM, Tri Tran wrote:
> They're lit in the bulding and have a much faster installation interval. =
How reliable are they?=20
> Tri Tran
>
