Cogent & HE
jeroen at unfix.org
Fri Jun 10 05:37:59 UTC 2011
On 2011-Jun-10 02:18, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 06:26:01PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> You seem to have missed it, so I will say again: IPv6 is not IPv4.
First you seem to have missed the point where the Internet is since the
day before yesterday the combination of IPv4+IPv6.
You also seemed to have missed the part where Tier1 are supposed to
provide quality native multi-path connectivity globally and not peering
mostly in a tunneled fashion (oh MTU what you don't reveal) with one
little router stashed at an unmanned IX.
Especially that tunneled part requires IPv4 to actually be able to
transmit those IPv6 packets, thus without the Tier1 status in IPv4 you
really cannot claim Tier1 in IPv6 in that case.
Also note that prefix count says nothing, first aggregate all the
prefixes properly, ignoring ASNs which use prefixes out of a PA dump,
then see how many are actually left.
Of course as an extra and possibly way more important metric: check how
many of those prefixes you would actually like to reach (that is where
you have an interest of sending packets to/from). You might indeed be
able to 'complete' your routes with it, but are those routes worth it
calling something a Tier1? ;)
More information about the NANOG