ipv6 transit over tunneled connection
kaeo at merike.com
Fri May 14 17:21:45 CDT 2010
On May 14, 2010, at 1:36 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> On May 14, 2010, at 3:43 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
>> (Sent from my Blackberry, please avoid the flames as I can't do
>> inline quoting)
>> Native IPv6 is a crapshoot. About the only people in the US that
>> I've seen that are no-bullshit IPv6 native ready is Hurricane
>> Electric. NTT is supposedly as well but I can't speak as to where
>> they have connectivity.
> I can say that we (NTT) have been IPv6 enabled or ready at all
> customer ports since ~2003. Anyone else who has not gotten there
> in the intervening years may have problems supporting you for your
> IPv4 as well :)
I had native eBGP with NTT in Dec 2005......this is when I was
working with Connection By Boeing in Seattle. Worked like a charm.
And yes, since I now live in Seattle, I have heard of some others
doing native although haven't validated.
>> Being that there's issues that leave us unable to get native
>> connectivity, we have a BGP tunnel thanks to HE (with a 20ms
>> latency from Seattle to Freemont).
> You should be able to get native IPv6 in Seattle from a variety of
> providers. If you're not finding it, you're not really looking
I'd 2nd that....
>> Tunnels suck if not done correctly. We sometimes have faster and
>> more reliable connections through IPv6, so ymmv.
> The tunneled part of the "IPv6" internet fell to the wayside a long
> time ago, there are stragglers and I have even seen people try to
> peer over tunnels in 2010, but anyone still adding that level of
> overlay (v6-over-v4) may find themselves in a world of hurt soon
> - Jared (Curious about what incumbent carrier plans are for end-
> user - eg qwest, att, vz resi)
More information about the NANOG