On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:
> Ouch... latency must be awful.
>
> I suppose this is based on Cogents reputation but who knows. The whole
> peering aspect of the networking business is often a mystery.
I dont think it is any mystery Cogent doesn't have many friends in the
E
Speaking of the devil:
"Comcast plans to enter into broadband IPv6 technical trials later
this year and into 2010," {Barry Tishgart, VP of Internet Services for
Comcast} said. "Planning for general deployment is underway."
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/06/18/1417201/Comcast-To-Bring-IPv6-To-Res
i can confirm that Level(3), at least in Madrid area is only offering tunneled
IPv6.
---
Nuno Vieira
nfsi telecom, lda.
nuno.vie...@nfsi.pt
Tel. (+351) 21 949 2300 - Fax (+351) 21 949 2301
http://www.nfsi.pt/
- "Robert Blayzor" wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2009, at 6:04 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
On Jun 14, 2009, at 6:04 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
For people trying to find the "list", check:
http://www.sixxs.net/faq/connectivity/?faq=ipv6transit
Since when has Level3 offered native IPv6? I nag our rep & SE's just
about every month on "when" and right now AFAIK it's still just tunnels
Hi Justin,
Just FYI - Global Crossing can currently deliver dual stack/native v6
transit in downtown KC,MO. You can either colo with them at 1100 Main St, or
possibly have them haul a wave to one of the other major downtown carrier
hotels they have strands running through / into (1102 Grand/B
Ouch... latency must be awful.
I suppose this is based on Cogents reputation but who knows. The whole
peering aspect of the networking business is often a mystery.
AKK wrote:
My main concern for European Cogent users is - no European peering with
global crossing - traffic goes via NY JFK. I
My main concern for European Cogent users is - no European peering with
global crossing - traffic goes via NY JFK. It has been like this for at
least a year and staff been giving assurances this should be sorted
soon. Probably there are more bad peerings - please share.
6: so-7-0-0c0.rt1.m
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>
> Steve Bertrand wrote:
>> Stephen Kratzer wrote:
>>
>>> And, they have no plans to support IPv6.
>> Ouch!
>>
>> I hope this is a non-starter for a lot of folks.
>
> read the rest of the thread...
...unfortunately, my message was sent out on the 11th, but just received
yest
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:14:31AM -0400, kris foster wrote:
>> Simply untrue, at the Peering BOF yesterday Cogent said they are
>> rolling this out.
>
> They saw my "How to deploy IPv6 in 30 minutes or less" tutorial on
> Sunday and a
2009/6/11 Tore Anderson
> > And, they have no plans to support IPv6.
>
> I have been promised, in writing, that they will provide us with native
> IPv6 transit before the end of the year.
>
> I'm based in Europe, though. Perhaps they're more flexible and
> customer-friendly here than in the US?
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:14:31AM -0400, kris foster wrote:
> Simply untrue, at the Peering BOF yesterday Cogent said they are
> rolling this out.
They saw my "How to deploy IPv6 in 30 minutes or less" tutorial on
Sunday and apparently it actually worked. Unfortunately I neglected to
mention t
On Jun 17, 2009, at 1:17 AM, Michael K. Smith wrote:
On 6/11/09 7:37 AM, "Steve Bertrand" wrote:
Stephen Kratzer wrote:
And, they have no plans to support IPv6.
Ouch!
I hope this is a non-starter for a lot of folks.
Steve
To quote Randy, I encourage all my competitors to do this.
S
On 6/11/09 7:37 AM, "Steve Bertrand" wrote:
> Stephen Kratzer wrote:
>
>> And, they have no plans to support IPv6.
>
> Ouch!
>
> I hope this is a non-starter for a lot of folks.
>
> Steve
To quote Randy, I encourage all my competitors to do this.
Mike
Justin Shore wrote:
> Paul Timmins wrote:
>> GlobalCrossing told me today I can order native IPv6 anywhere on their
>> network. Don't know if they count as Tier 1 on your list, though. VZB
>> has given me tunnels for a while, hopefully they'll get their pMTU
>> issue fixed so we can do more interes
Steve Bertrand wrote:
> Stephen Kratzer wrote:
>
>> And, they have no plans to support IPv6.
>
> Ouch!
>
> I hope this is a non-starter for a lot of folks.
read the rest of the thread...
joel
> Steve
Justin Shore wrote:
> I'm in search of some information about Cogent, it's past, present and
> future. I've heard bits and pieces about Cogent's past over the years
> but by no means have I actively been keeping up.
We've used cogent for the past year, 100 over GigE.
- Clueful and responsive te
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 17:56:51 EDT, German Martinez said:
> I guess the blackholing could come from Cogent having a route to you but *YOU*
> not having a route back to Cogent as a consequence of the depeering.
Wouldn't that only happen if some AS was foolish enough to single-home upstream
of a Tier
German Martinez wrote:
> On Thu Jun 11, 2009, John van Oppen wrote:
>
>> NTT (2914) and GBLX (3549) both do native v6... most everyone else on
>> the tier1 list does tunnels. :(
>
> AS5511 runs a double stack network for at least 7 years.
>
>> There are some nice tier2 networks who do native v
On Thu Jun 11, 2009, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> > I'm aware of some (regular?) depeering issues. The NANOG archives have
>
> AFAIR, there has never been a black-holing, just disappearance of routes. If
> you are properly multihomed, this is irrelevant and you continue to eat your
> ice cream and
et
> come to mind.
>
>
> -John
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Timmins [mailto:p...@telcodata.us]
> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 4:00 PM
> To: Justin Shore
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Cogent input
>
>
> >
> > I hope at least some
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Justin Shore wrote:
> I'm in search of some information about Cogent, it's past, present and
> future. I've heard bits and pieces about Cogent's past over the years but
> by no means have I actively been keeping up.
>
I had a very positive interaction with the C
In a message written on Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 08:13:02AM -0500, Justin Shore
wrote:
> Let me rephrase that. :-) I know of no tier-Ns that offer any native v6
> services here in the Midwest (central Kansas) including L3 which only
> has a best effort pilot program using tunnels. There might be m
Paul Timmins wrote:
GlobalCrossing told me today I can order native IPv6 anywhere on their
network. Don't know if they count as Tier 1 on your list, though. VZB
has given me tunnels for a while, hopefully they'll get their pMTU issue
fixed so we can do more interesting things with it.
I'd lov
John van Oppen wrote:
NTT (2914) and GBLX (3549) both do native v6... most everyone else on
the tier1 list does tunnels. :(
There are some nice tier2 networks who do native v6, tiscali and he.net
come to mind.
Let me rephrase that. :-) I know of no tier-Ns that offer any native v6
services
That might be because some bigger providers in the Netherlands are
throwing out transits that don't support IPv6.
So there's your commercial necessity ;-)
Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Hi!
Should have said "And, they have no plans to deploy IPv6 in the
immediate
future."
:)
"Cogent's offici
> It's worth noting that being a v4 "tier1"/transit-free network doesn't
> necessarily mean that they're the same in the v6 world. For instance,
> Google appears to be a transit-free v6 network. It wouldn't surprise me
> if the same is true for other big v6 players like Tinet and HE.
Good point.
Good morning,
* John van Oppen
> NTT (2914) and GBLX (3549) both do native v6... most everyone else
> on the tier1 list does tunnels. :(
>
> There are some nice tier2 networks who do native v6, tiscali and
> he.net come to mind.
It's worth noting that being a v4 "tier1"/transit-free network d
Does GBLX still have their data center in Chinatown(NYC)??? I remember about 10
years ago how amazed I was with that place...
- Original Message -
From: John van Oppen
To: Paul Timmins ; Justin Shore
Cc: NANOG
Sent: Thu Jun 11 15:31:24 2009
Subject: RE: Cogent input
NTT (2914) and
, 2009 4:00 PM
To: Justin Shore
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: Cogent input
>
> I hope at least some SPs make this commitment back in the states. I
> can't find any tier-1s that can provide us with native v6. Our tier-1
> upstream has a best effort test program in place that uses
I hope at least some SPs make this commitment back in the states. I
can't find any tier-1s that can provide us with native v6. Our tier-1
upstream has a best effort test program in place that uses ipv6ip
tunnels. The other upstream says that they aren't making any public
IPv6 plans yet.
Tore Anderson wrote:
advertise loopbacks, and another for the actual feed. The biggest
issue we have with them is that they don't allow deaggregation. If
you've been allocated a prefix of length yy, they'll accept only
x.x.x.x/yy, not x.x.x.x/yy le 24. Yes, sometimes deaggregation is
necessary o
On Jun 11, 2009, at 5:28 PM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Not from what i have been told, but hey i am not working there. We
got a v6 transit offer as pilot from them so perhaps they are moving
towards live service Would not be strange in this current
stage...
same thing here.
routing
> I'm aware of some (regular?) depeering issues. The NANOG archives have
AFAIR, there has never been a black-holing, just disappearance of routes. If
you are properly multihomed, this is irrelevant and you continue to eat your
ice cream and chuckle while they fight it out. It's amusing, really.
ther players (at least in our market) that are
>> > priced very similar now and have a better history behind them.
>> >
>> > The specific de-peering issues never effected us much due to enough
>> > diversity in our upstreams and a fair amount of direct/public
On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:03 AM, Stephen Kratzer wrote:
Perhaps you missed my quote:
"Cogent's official stance on IPv6 is that we will deploy IPv6 when it
becomes a commercial necessity. We have tested IPv6 and we have our
plan
for rolling it out, but there are no commercial drivers to spend m
Hi!
"Cogent's official stance on IPv6 is that we will deploy IPv6 when it
becomes a commercial necessity. We have tested IPv6 and we have our
plan
for rolling it out, but there are no commercial drivers to spend money
to upgrade a network to IPv6 for no real return on investment."
Thats stran
Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
"Cogent's official stance on IPv6 is that we will deploy IPv6 when it
becomes a commercial necessity. We have tested IPv6 and we have our
plan
for rolling it out, but there are no commercial drivers to spend money
to upgrade a network to IPv6 for
Hi!
Should have said "And, they have no plans to deploy IPv6 in the immediate
future."
:)
"Cogent's official stance on IPv6 is that we will deploy IPv6 when it
becomes a commercial necessity. We have tested IPv6 and we have our plan
for rolling it out, but there are no commercial drivers to
You email is faster them mine ;)
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 11:09 -0400, Stephen Kratzer wrote:
> Perhaps you missed my amendment:
>
> Should have said "And, they have no plans to deploy IPv6 in the immediate
> future."
>
> :)
>
> On Thursday 11 June 2009 11:06:38 Bret Clark wrote:
> > Far differ
Perhaps you missed my amendment:
Should have said "And, they have no plans to deploy IPv6 in the immediate
future."
:)
On Thursday 11 June 2009 11:06:38 Bret Clark wrote:
> Far different response then whoever quoted..."And, they have no plans to
> support IPv6."
>
> On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 11:03
Far different response then whoever quoted..."And, they have no plans to
support IPv6."
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 11:03 -0400, Stephen Kratzer wrote:
> Perhaps you missed my quote:
>
> "Cogent's official stance on IPv6 is that we will deploy IPv6 when it
> becomes a commercial necessity. We have te
Perhaps you missed my quote:
"Cogent's official stance on IPv6 is that we will deploy IPv6 when it
becomes a commercial necessity. We have tested IPv6 and we have our plan
for rolling it out, but there are no commercial drivers to spend money
to upgrade a network to IPv6 for no real return on inve
On Jun 11, 2009, at 9:33 AM, Stephen Kratzer wrote:
The biggest issue we have with them is that they don't allow
deaggregation. If you've been allocated a prefix of length yy,
they'll accept
only x.x.x.x/yy, not x.x.x.x/yy le 24. Yes, sometimes deaggregation is
necessary or desirable even if
Hello,
* Stephen Kratzer
> We've only recently started using Cogent transit, but it's been
> stable since its introduction 6 months ago. Turn-up was a bit rocky
> since we never received engineering details, and engineering was
> atypical in that two eBGP sessions were established, one just to
>
We've been using Cogent for 4 months now and I have no major
complaints.
Stephen Kratzer wrote:
> Should have said "And, they have no plans to deploy IPv6 in the immediate
> future."
>
> On Thursday 11 June 2009 10:33:25 Stephen Kratzer wrote:
>
>> We've only recently started using Cogent transit, but it's been stable
>> since its introduction 6 months ago. Turn-up
I'm skeptical as to where this info came from since this seems nothing
more then nay-say? if people are going to make grandiose statements then
they should justify them with reputable evidence. I would be extremely
surprised if Cogent engineering isn't working on a IPv6 plan or doesn't
have one al
Hi Justin,
> I'm in search of some information about Cogent, it's past, present and
> future. I've heard bits and pieces about Cogent's past over the years
> but by no means have I actively been keeping up.
We recently got a 10-gig port in Oslo from them. Price-wise they were
competitive but ab
Stephen Kratzer wrote:
> And, they have no plans to support IPv6.
Ouch!
I hope this is a non-starter for a lot of folks.
Steve
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Should have said "And, they have no plans to deploy IPv6 in the immediate
future."
On Thursday 11 June 2009 10:33:25 Stephen Kratzer wrote:
> We've only recently started using Cogent transit, but it's been stable
> since its introduction 6 months ago. Turn-up was a bit rocky since we never
> rece
We've only recently started using Cogent transit, but it's been stable since
its introduction 6 months ago. Turn-up was a bit rocky since we never
received engineering details, and engineering was atypical in that two eBGP
sessions were established, one just to advertise loopbacks, and another f
nt: Thursday, June 11, 2009 10:17 AM
To: NANOG
Subject: Re: Cogent input
I hate when these questions get asked, because as the saying goes..."a
person happy with a service will only tell one other person, but a
person unhappy with a service with tell ten other people". So I think a
On Jun 11, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 10:01 AM 6/11/2009, Andrew Mulholland wrote:
We didn't have such problems.
Had nx1Gig from them.
On the few occasions where we had some slight issues, I was happy to
be able to get through to some one useful on the phone quickly, and
not
Justin Shore wrote (on Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 08:46:45AM -0500):
> I'm in search of some information about Cogent, it's past, present and
> future. I've heard bits and pieces about Cogent's past over the years
> but by no means have I actively been keeping up.
We've had Cogent for several years i
gh
> > diversity in our upstreams and a fair amount of direct/public peering...
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Justin Shore [mailto:jus...@justinshore.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June
At 10:01 AM 6/11/2009, Andrew Mulholland wrote:
We didn't have such problems.
Had nx1Gig from them.
On the few occasions where we had some slight issues, I was happy to
be able to get through to some one useful on the phone quickly, and
not play pass the parcel with call centre operatives.
ted us much due to enough
> diversity in our upstreams and a fair amount of direct/public peering...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Justin Shore [mailto:jus...@justinshore.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:47 AM
> To: NAN
h due to enough
diversity in our upstreams and a fair amount of direct/public peering...
Thanks,
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Justin Shore [mailto:jus...@justinshore.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:47 AM
To: NANOG
Subject: Cogent input
I'm in search of some information abo
I'm in search of some information about Cogent, it's past, present and
future. I've heard bits and pieces about Cogent's past over the years
but by no means have I actively been keeping up.
I'm aware of some (regular?) depeering issues. The NANOG archives have
given me some additional insigh
59 matches
Mail list logo
