Also, it doesn't seem to be enabled on ports that have static ipv4 but progress is progress. we'll take it.
Nimrod On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:17 AM Matthew Huff <mh...@ox.com> wrote: > Still no IPv6 in Westchester County, NY ☹ > > > > Great sign though, maybe NY will get it eventually > > > > *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces+mhuff=ox....@nanog.org> * On Behalf Of *Joe > Loiacono > *Sent:* Monday, June 13, 2022 10:55 AM > *To:* nanog@nanog.org > *Subject:* Re: Congrats to AS701 > > > > FiOS from Maryland (anonymized): > > enp3s0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > inet 192.168.1.164 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.1.255 > inet6 fe80::b104:8f4d:e5b2:e13b prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link> > inet6 2600:4040:b27f:cb00:a9b1:5f59:xxxx:xxxx prefixlen 64 > scopeid 0x0<global> > inet6 2600:4040:b27f:cb00:24a8:7b31:xxxx:xxxx prefixlen 64 > scopeid 0x0<global> > inet6 2600:4040:b27f:cb00:e1b6:8b83:xxxx:xxxx prefixlen 64 > scopeid 0x0<global> > ether d0:67:e5:23:ec:fe txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) > RX packets 2518066 bytes 1448982813 (1.4 GB) > RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 frame 0 > TX packets 2157395 bytes 260073952 (260.0 MB) > TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 > > a@b:~$ ping 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a > PING 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a(2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a) 56 data bytes > 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=24.0 ms > 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=17.6 ms > 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=20.4 ms > 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=23.4 ms > ^C > --- 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a ping statistics --- > 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 17.618/21.351/23.983/2.555 ms > > > > On 6/12/2022 1:55 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 11, 2022 at 11:03 PM Darrel Lewis (darlewis) < > darle...@cisco.com> wrote: > > I, for one, am having a hard time finding the proper words to express the > joy that I am feeling at this momentous moment! > > > > > > It's quite amazing, I think... that it's taken so long to get to > deployment you can actually see on the fios plant :) > > I'd note I can't see the below on my homestead, but I can at a relative's > (where the ifconfig data is from). > > I also can't tell if the upstream will PD a block to the downstream... and > the VZ CPE is 'not something I want to fiddle with', > > because everytime I have tried at my house I've just taken it out behind > the woodshed with a maul... and replaced it with > > something I CAN configure successfully. (plus.. don't want that TR 069 in > my home...) > > > > -chris > > > > -Darrel > > > > On Jun 11, 2022, at 7:05 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Looks like FIOS customers may be getting ipv6 deployed toward them, > finally: > > ifconfig snippet from local machine: > inet6 2600:4040:2001:2200:73d2:6bcc:1e6b:43a1 prefixlen 64 > scopeid 0x0<global> > inet6 2600:4040:2001:2200:e87:bf36:b6cb:6ce1 prefixlen 64 > scopeid 0x0<global> > > > > ping attempt: > > 64 bytes from bh-in-f106.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a): icmp_seq=1 > ttl=59 time=8.71 ms > > > > 8ms from mclean, va to ashburn, va isn't wondrous, but at least it's ipv6 > (and marginally faster than ipv4) > > > > Congrats to the 701 folk for deploying more widely! > > (note: I don't know exactly when this started, nor how wide it really > is, but progress here is welcomed by myself at least :) ) > > -chris > >
