The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane Electric - and how to solve it

Fri Jan 22 02:30:51 UTC 2016

> On Jan 21, 2016, at 1:05 PM, Ca By <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Brandon Butterworth <brandon at rd.bbc.co.uk>
> wrote:
> 
>>>> On Jan 21, 2016, at 1:07 PM, Matthew D. Hardeman <
>> mhardeman at ipifony.com> wrote:
>>>> Since Cogent is clearly the bad actor here (the burden being
>>>> Cogent's to prove otherwise because HE is publicly on record as saying
>>>> that theyd love to peer with Cogent)
>> 
>> I'd like to peer with all tier 1's, they are thus all bad as
>> they won't.
>> 
>> HE decided they want to be transit free for v6 and set out on
>> a campaign of providing free tunnels/transit/peering to establish
>> this. Cogent, for all their faults, are free to not accept the
>> offer.
>> 
>> Can the Cogent bashing stop now, save it for when they do something
>> properly bad.
>> 
>> brandon
> 
> Selling a service that is considered internet but does not deliver full
> internet access is generally considered properly bad.
> 
> I would not do business with either company, since neither of them provide
> a full view.
> 
> CB

I note that if IPv6 was actually important, neither one could have gotten away with it for so long.

Matthew Kaufman

(Sent from my iPhone)