[188159] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: AW: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dennis Burgess)
Thu Mar 10 10:09:24 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Dennis Burgess <dmburgess@linktechs.net>
To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:09:15 +0000
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.1603091217490.6833@soloth.lewis.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Not wishing to get into a pissing war with who is right or wrong, but it so=
unds like google already pays or has an agreement with cogent for v4, as th=
at's unaffected, cogent says google is simply not advertising v6 prefixes t=
o them, so, how is that cogent's fault?
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Lewis [mailto:jlewis@lewis.org]=20
Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 11:26 AM
To: J=FCrgen Jaritsch <JJaritsch@anexia-it.com>
Cc: Dennis Burgess <dmburgess@linktechs.net>; North American Network Operat=
ors' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: Re: AW: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
In other words, GOOG is playing peering chicken with Cogent for IPv6. I'm =
not surprised. I suggested it during talks with GOOG roughly 10 years ago.=
..not saying I had any influence...I'm pretty sure I did not. :)
GOOG wants Cogent to peer. Cogent wants GOOG to pay for transit (from them=
or someone else to get to Cogent). If you're well peered / multihomed, it=
's not much of an issue. If you're a single-homed Cogent customer, you sho=
uld complain to Cogent that they're not providing full
IPv6 connectivity.
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016, J=FCrgen Jaritsch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> mail from Cogent:
>>>>>
> Dear Cogent Customer,
>
> Thank you for contacting Cogent Customer Support for information about th=
e Google IPv6 addresses you are unable to reach.
>
> Google uses transit providers to announce their IPv4 routes to Cogent.
>
> At this time however, Google has chosen not to announce their IPv6 routes=
to Cogent through transit providers.
>
> We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you and will notify you=
if there is an update to the situation.
> <<<<
>
> Mail from Google:
>>>>>
> Unfortunately it seems that your transit provider does not have IPv6 conn=
ectivity with Google. We suggest you ask your transit provider to look for =
alternatives to interconnect with us.
>
> Google maintains an open interconnect policy for IPv6 and welcomes any ne=
twork to peer with us for access via IPv6 (and IPv4). For those networks th=
at aren't able, or chose not to peer with Google via IPv6, they are able to=
reach us through any of a large number of transit providers.
>
> For more information in how to peer directly with Google please visit=20
> https://peering.google.com <<<<
>
> best regards
>
> J=FCrgen Jaritsch
> Head of Network & Infrastructure
>
> ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH
>
> Telefon: +43-5-0556-300
> Telefax: +43-5-0556-500
>
> E-Mail: JJaritsch@anexia-it.com
> Web: http://www.anexia-it.com
>
>
>
> Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstra=DFe 140, 9020=20
> Klagenfurt
> Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrer: Alexander Windbichler
> Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT=20
> U63216601
>
>
> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+jjaritsch=3Danexia-it.com@nanog.org] Im=
=20
> Auftrag von Dennis Burgess
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 09. M=E4rz 2016 17:01
> An: North American Network Operators' Group
> Betreff: Cogent - Google - HE Fun
>
> I just noticed that I am NOT getting IPV6 Google prefixes though Cogent a=
t all. I was told google pulled all of their peering with Cogent? If I br=
ing up a SIT tunnel with HE, I get the prefixes but at horrible speed and l=
atency .. anyone else?
>
> [DennisBurgessSignature]
> www.linktechs.net<http://www.linktechs.net/> - 314-735-0270 x103 -=20
> dmburgess@linktechs.net<mailto:dmburgess@linktechs.net>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route
| therefore you are _________ http://www.lew=
is.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
