|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Interconnects
> > On Fri, 17 May 2002 [email protected] wrote: > > perhaps better late than never... PAIX & LINX both > > have IPv6 capabilities at/on the exchange fabric(s). > > I am not aware that Equinix has taken that step. > > Uhm, another dumb question. > > Why does the operator of a layer 2 exchange care (or know) what > protocols your are using? IPv4, IPv6, heck I remember seeing > Appletalk, OSI and DECNET on MAE-EAST. What consenting network > operators do.... > > What step does Equinix (or any other layer 2 exchange) need to do? > The ATM NAPs might have an issue due to ATM/ARP, but even then I suspect > two consenting network operators could use static IPv6 ARP tables > without the NAP operator doing anything. Two things: IPv6 can and does take advantage of larger MTU sizes. Selection of switch fabric makes a difference. Often, participants expect to have an IP address assigned for their use on an exchange. Usually these delegations are from a common block. Where they are not, its hard to tell an exchange from a bunch of point2point links. LINX and PAIX have IPv6 prefixes that participants can use. I would expect that if the Equinix exchange participants were IPv6 hungry, they would ask for a way to get a v6 address for their connection. And I would expect Equinix would find a way to accomodate them. Otherwise you are correct, the operators don't have to coordinate at all, except on a bilateral basis and then.... whats the point of the exchange? :)
|