[182233] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: another tilt at the Verizon FIOS IPv6 windmill
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mel Beckman)
Mon Jul 13 16:59:15 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org>
To: David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 20:57:07 +0000
In-Reply-To: <FCD26398C5EDE746BFC47F43EA52A17305A16115@dino.ad.hostasaurus.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
David,
Did you consider running an IPv6 tunnel through HE.net?
-mel via cell
> On Jul 13, 2015, at 1:46 PM, David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com=
> wrote:
>=20
>> On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, Paul B. Henson wrote:
>>=20
>> Seems to be a lot less noise on this iteration of the shake fist at=20
>> Verizon's lack of IPv6 thread, I guess everybody is pretty much burned
>=20
>> out and given up 8-/. Verizon should just update their IPv6 status=20
>> page with a link to hurricane electric's tunnel broker page <sigh>.
>=20
> I think that's exactly what's occurred. There was a point where I spent
> several years wasting time sending notes to the sales rep, opening
> support tickets, trolling them on twitter and their own forum, etc., all
> with either no useful answer or no answer at all; ultimately I gave up
> and replaced the inexpensive Fios connection with a more $$ TWTC
> circuit. I'd flip it back to Fios if they rolled out v6 since it was a
> lot less expensive and had been perfectly reliable at the location that
> used it.
>=20
> David
