![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:27:36 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) From: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> To: Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org> Cc: nanog@nanog.org In-Reply-To: <31cb1f9de072476531ea64a7e8e9abc4@isc.org> Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Joe Abley wrote: > Right now we're using a 6to4 relay router in Verio's network for most traffic, > although we do see other paths, so mileage may vary depending on which edge > router the outbound traffic from ISC happens to exit through. Hm. I traced now and I see a route similar to yours, from what appears to be the opposite interface sides of those boxes. In any case, your routing *is* working. However, that doesn't seem to be the case for many North American providers. Worse yet, I don't think anyone is volunteering a route into the global BGP4+ table -- so all these little networks are simply on their own if their v6 upstreams don't hand them a direct 2002::/16 route. (ObNANOG: "Hint, hint, hint, hint, hint, hint, hint, hint, hint, hint.") And wouldn't you know, now I can't see part of the RIPE world -- including www.ripe.net itself -- from a 6to4 host, but a fixed tunnel host sees it fine. This doesn't look good. <sigh> -- -- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |