North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 news

  • Date: Thu Oct 13 20:21:40 2005

Of course, that's a business decision, but may be instead of getting a new
check for the IPv6 service, not providing it, you will lost some checks from
existing customers who demand dual stack ;-)

Business is also be competitive, and other carriers already have the service
as a value added to the existing IPv4 customers.


> De: "Christopher L. Morrow" <[email protected]>
> Responder a: <[email protected]>
> Fecha: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 22:55:09 +0000 (GMT)
> Para: Jeroen Massar <[email protected]>
> CC: Peter Lothberg <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
> Asunto: Re: IPv6 news
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 11:05 -0700, Peter Lothberg wrote:
>>> Is there anyone who can talk to it using IPv6 on the Nanog list?
>>> (Time20.Stupi.SE, 2001:0440:1880:1000::0020)
>> As a certain "Tier 1" still uses a mesh of tunnels and uses Viagenie in
>> Canada as their transit provider latency to the above IP is in the area
>> of 300ms, going transatlantic twice. IPv4 latency is only 66ms though.
>> I do hope that some "Tier 1's" get their act together and start doing
>> native IPv6. I already once suggested upgrading their hardware to
>> them ;)
> I also presume you sent them a check and showed them the business case for
> the upgrade? No large provider is going to upgrade anything without a
> business reason. Oh, and some parts, critical parts even, of v6 are still
> 'broken'...

The IPv6 Portal:

Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Information available at:

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.