North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: Stephen Sprunk
  • Date: Fri Oct 14 13:09:13 2005

Thus spake "Mike Leber" <[email protected]>
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Michael Greb wrote:
I can't speak for the others but doesn't seem to interested in
customers making use of their "dual stack" network.  We looked into
getting IPv6 space from them to go with our IPv4 assignments for a
couple of racks of servers in one of their datacenters.  They wanted to
double the monthly fee for data and drop a second v6 only port to our
racks, not my idea of a "dual stack network".  Needless to say, we do
not have native IPv6, a few of our customers that desired it are using
HE's free tunnel broker service though.
(Appologies to Michael for using this comment as an opportunity to
delurk.  I've been biting my tongue for months through all kinds of
IPv6 threads.)

Hurricane's approach to IPv6 is very simple.

We have the free IPv6 tunnel service and we have commercial IPv6

If you want commercial IPv6 service, we need to charge a fee for it in
order to get the necessary funds that will eventually be required to
replace all of the older infrastructure that doesn't do line rate IPv6.
Hurricane's price for IPv6 is the same as IPv4 at any specific commit
It is understandable that you charge extra for a v6-enabled port due to your need to fund upgraded hardware. However, that doesn't explain why you don't deliver v4 and v6 both over the same higher-priced port. If your backbone isn't native, then a single edge box could connect to both the v4 backbone and the v6 backbone.


Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov