[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

ipv6 transit over tunneled connection



I have both Level3 and NTT v6 connections and there are no additional
charges for the service.  I recall NTT had one a few years ago, but I
think that's fallen by the wayside.

Mike
--
Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP
Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith at adhost.com
w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050
PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3  08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)





On 2/17/11 7:01 PM, "Jack Carrozzo" <jack at crepinc.com> wrote:

>We pick up v6 from HE currently (like the rest of the world). L3 offered
>us
>dual stack also, but they wanted money to set it up plus MRC. None of our
>Bits That Matter (tm) go over v6 anyhow. (I guess the right phrase would
>be
>"revenue producing bits").
>
>-Jack Carrozzo
>
>On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Eric Van Tol <eric at atlantech.net> wrote:
>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared at puck.nether.net]
>> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 2:49 PM
>> > To: Jack Carrozzo
>> > Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>> > Subject: Re: ipv6 transit over tunneled connection
>> >
>> > I'm curious what providers have not gotten their IPv6
>> > plans/networks/customer ports enabled.
>> >
>> > I know that Comcast is doing their trials now (Thanks John!) and will
>>be
>> > presenting at the upcoming NANOG about their experiences.
>> >
>> > What parts of the big "I" Internet are not enabled or ready?
>> >
>>
>> We don't see Savvis, Level3, or AboveNet with IPv6 capabilities in our
>> region (DC).  Two years ago, neither Verizon or AT&T had IPv6, either.
>>Not
>> sure about them now, as we no longer use them for transit.  One would
>>think
>> everyone would have v6 capabilities in the heart of government
>>territory,
>> but okay.
>>
>> For whatever reason, Verio actually charges (or used to) for their IPv6
>> separately from IPv4 and to top it all off, it wasn't significantly
>> discounted.
>>
>> -evt
>>
>>
>>