|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Bad IPv6 connectivity or why not to announce more specifics(Was: IPv6 news)
On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 15:38 -0400, [email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:06:30 +0200, Jeroen Massar said: > > > Well Valdis, that bad route also has to do with your side of the > > equation, you might want to check who you are actually using as transits > > and if the routes they are providing to you are sane enough. > > Well, if somebody at stupi.se wants to do a traceroute6 back at us, I'll > be glad to see what the reverse path looks like... but last I heard > traceroute and traceroute6 showed the *forward* path of packets.. That is correct, try tracepath, this shows at least the assymetry. You can also peek at GRH to see a probable AS path back. ASN's still tell a lot in IPv6. Next month I'll finalize the 'symmetry' tool which allows one to do the AS path checkup between two places automatically. > > 2001:468::/32 is in the routing table, getting accepted by most ISP's. > > This one has a reasonable route > > The real problem (at least for the forward direction from here) is that the > outbound packets get into the Abilene network, and the best path from there to > 2001:440:1880 is a 3ffe: tunnel to japan and then another 3ffe: tunnel back to New > York. Kick Abilene to not be so silly and get some real transits. Then again Abiline is educational and those networks seem to have very nice (read: overcomplex) routing policies... Greets, Jeroen Attachment:
signature.asc
|