[85550] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 news
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (K. Scott Bethke)
Thu Oct 13 16:33:39 2005
From: "K. Scott Bethke" <scott@carpathiahost.com>
To: "'Michael Greb'" <michael@thegrebs.com>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:30:18 -0400
In-reply-to: <20051013201607.GA17325@thegrebs.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> I can't speak for the others but he.net doesn't seem to interested in
> customers making use of their "dual stack" network. We looked into
> getting IPv6 space from them to go with our IPv4 assignments for a
> couple of racks of servers in one of their datacenters. They wanted to
> double the monthly fee for data and drop a second v6 only port to our
> racks, not my idea of a "dual stack network". Needless to say, we do
> not have native IPv6, a few of our customers that desired it are using
> HE's free tunnel broker service though.
It is possible that they deployed a second group of routers to do ipv6
rather than bet it all on a dual stack. Heck I've seen engineers at various
places digging 7507's out of the dumpster in hopes of getting their company
going on v6. HE.NET has been doing ipv6 for a long time now so it is (also)
possible that their deployment pre-dates a 75% bug free IOS version for dual
stack. I can't comment on any sort of pricing going on. Rumor has it that
some transit and hosting companies are indeed selling IPv6 today (and
surprisingly enough actually have customers buying it).
-Scott
