[arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6

[Adrian Goins]

I was sucked into the Cogent/HE problems during World IPv6 day v1 and v2.  It ultimately affected one of my clients deciding to keep IPv6 up for their infrastructure - they saw that split in reachability as bad for their customers, since customers using HE as a tunnel broker would think that the client was the problem, not peering.  For most users of the Internet discussions about peering have no value.

I agree with the statement about multihoming being the solution.  If you can't afford to multihome, see about getting your connectivity from a provider who _is_ multihomed.  It puts you a couple hops away from the backbone, but it may be worth it to route around this issue.  You might even be able to find someone in your datacenter who can throw a cross-connect to your cage and push you out to L3 or ATT or someone other than Cogent.

We're up with IPv6 transit from Cogent and L3, using our own /32.  I have the opportunity to get transit directly from HE, and I'm considering doing so as well.  I think that the whole squabble is bad for the Internet and terrible for IPv6 adoption as a whole, but it's almost worth it for me to pay for the extra handoff to not be drawn into it any more than I have to be. 

What I'm waiting for is IPv6 to the real end users.  If TWC or Comcast or Vz would reliably roll out IPv6 across their customer networks, it would make life much easier.  One of our providers at our EU office was kind enough to enable IPv6 on our wireless link, but when I asked them about giving me a /64 or /48, they were stupefied.  It hadn't occurred to them that we actually need to have an IP block in order to make use of it.  

I think we're still a long way off from where we should be for awareness and adoption, and, like most things business humans do, until it's actually the end of the freakin' IPv4 world, no one is going to make a move.

Adrian Goins
agoins at arces.net




On Feb 22, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Kerry L. Kriegel <kkriegel at cyberlynk.net> wrote:

> We only broadcast our data center /32.   Cogent is the only provider we have doing IPv6 at the moment.
>  
> AT&T says they do it, but getting it implemented across our peering link has been in process for several months.
> TWTC has the request, and may be online within the week.
> TWC --  no way.
> Cogent – online.
> Level3 – online in about 45 days.
>  
> Thank you,
>  
> Kerry L. Kriegel
> Network Operations Engineer
> Cyberlynk Network, Inc.
> Office: 414-858-9335
> Fax:  414-858-9336
>  
> From: Michael Wallace [mailto:michael at birdhosting.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 10:53 AM
> To: Kerry L. Kriegel; arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: re: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
>  
> There are plenty of providers out there that do IPv6.  We are currently terminating to a bunch of them.  Abovenet, Level3, HE, etc etc.  Are you broadcasting the BGP for these?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael Wallace
> Bird Hosting
>  
> 
> From: "Kerry L. Kriegel" <kkriegel at cyberlynk.net>
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 8:48 AM
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
> 
> We received our /32 IPv6 block from ARIN awhile back but before we could do anything with it we needed to do some hardware / IOS upgrades on our backbone.  We got enough of that finished last week that we decided to “roll out” IPv6 and see how things looked.
>  
> After a couple days of trouble shooting why none of the engineers in our data center could reach their Hurricane Electric Tunnel networks at home (and vice versa),  I stopped looking at our backbone and started looking at Google.
>  
> It appears that the squabble started in 2009 between Cogent and HE is still in progress.  I was wondering if anyone on this list had any “inside” information about the problem and whether or not there was an end in sight.  It seems to me that having a disconnect between two major players is going to hinder IPv6 adaptation.
>  
>  
>  
> Thank you,
>  
> Kerry L. Kriegel
> Network Operations Engineer
> Cyberlynk Network, Inc.
> Office: 414-858-9335
> Fax:  414-858-9336
>  
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20130227/e23cc161/attachment.html>