Did IPv6 between HE and Google ever get resolved?
Hey all, I’ve been having bad luck searching around, but did IPv6 transit between HE and google ever get resolved? Ironically, I can now get to them cheaply from a location we currently have equipment that has been Cogent-only, so if it fixes the IPv6 issue I’d like to make the move. Anyone peer with HE in general and want to share their experience offlist? With the price, if they’re a good option, I’d consider rolling them in to other locations where we have redundancy already, so the v6 isn’t as big a deal there. Thanks
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 12:40 PM David Hubbard < dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
Hey all, I’ve been having bad luck searching around, but did IPv6 transit between HE and google ever get resolved? Ironically, I can now get to them cheaply from a location we currently have equipment that has been Cogent-only, so if it fixes the IPv6 issue I’d like to make the move. Anyone peer with HE in general and want to share their experience offlist? With the price, if they’re a good option, I’d consider rolling them in to other locations where we have redundancy already, so the v6 isn’t as big a deal there.
Thanks
I wasn't aware of any issues between HE.net and Google; are you sure you don't mean HE.net and Cogent? Matt
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 4:33 AM Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 12:40 PM David Hubbard < dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
Hey all, I’ve been having bad luck searching around, but did IPv6 transit between HE and google ever get resolved? Ironically, I can now get to them cheaply from a location we currently have equipment that has been Cogent-only, so if it fixes the IPv6 issue I’d like to make the move. Anyone peer with HE in general and want to share their experience offlist? With the price, if they’re a good option, I’d consider rolling them in to other locations where we have redundancy already, so the v6 isn’t as big a deal there.
Thanks
I wasn't aware of any issues between HE.net and Google; are you sure you don't mean HE.net and Cogent?
Matt
Ah. Sorry, the changed subject line didn't thread in with this, so this showed up as an unreplied singleton in my inbox. Apologies for the duplicated response; at least this won't be a lonely singleton in anyone else's inbox now. ^_^; Matt
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 4:37 AM Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 4:33 AM Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 12:40 PM David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote:
Hey all, I’ve been having bad luck searching around, but did IPv6 transit between HE and google ever get resolved? Ironically, I can now get to them cheaply from a location we currently have equipment that has been Cogent-only, so if it fixes the IPv6 issue I’d like to make the move. Anyone peer with HE in general and want to share their experience offlist? With the price, if they’re a good option, I’d consider rolling them in to other locations where we have redundancy already, so the v6 isn’t as big a deal there.
Thanks
I wasn't aware of any issues between HE.net and Google; are you sure you don't mean HE.net and Cogent?
thread subject still says 'google and he', I don't think there's ever been problems between google/he for v6. I think there are some issues from cogent - > he over v6 :( Looking at a sample AS6939 customer link I see no: ".* 174$" ".* 174 .*$" routes in the bgp stream :( Looking at a AS174 customer link session I see no: ".* 6939$" ".* 6939 .*" routes in the bgp stream :( -chris
Matt
Ah. Sorry, the changed subject line didn't thread in with this, so this showed up as an unreplied singleton in my inbox.
Apologies for the duplicated response; at least this won't be a lonely singleton in anyone else's inbox now. ^_^;
Matt
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 6:07 PM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
thread subject still says 'google and he', I don't think there's ever been problems between google/he for v6. I think there are some issues from cogent - > he over v6 :(
Looking at a sample AS6939 customer link I see no: ".* 174$" ".* 174 .*$"
routes in the bgp stream :(
Looking at a AS174 customer link session I see no: ".* 6939$" ".* 6939 .*"
routes in the bgp stream :(
Apologies, I do actually see a path from 174 -> 6939 (well 28 paths): 174 <many different 3-5 asn> 6939 <customer asn> it's clearly not all of HE -> Cogent, and it's clearly not supposed to be working (I would think). -chris
-chris
Matt
Ah. Sorry, the changed subject line didn't thread in with this, so this showed up as an unreplied singleton in my inbox.
Apologies for the duplicated response; at least this won't be a lonely singleton in anyone else's inbox now. ^_^;
Matt
The routes you see are Cogent using IPv6 leaks. We chase these down as we see them. Obviously if Cogent is happy enough to use leaks, we could just give them our IPv6 customer routes directly. ;) As a backbone operator, I'd prefer all routing we do (for at least the first hop leaving our network) to be intentional. Perhaps they are the same? Should I wait for to get an interesting email? (haha) Mike. On 3/31/19 6:10 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 6:07 PM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
thread subject still says 'google and he', I don't think there's ever been problems between google/he for v6. I think there are some issues from cogent - > he over v6 :(
Looking at a sample AS6939 customer link I see no: ".* 174$" ".* 174 .*$"
routes in the bgp stream :(
Looking at a AS174 customer link session I see no: ".* 6939$" ".* 6939 .*"
routes in the bgp stream :( Apologies, I do actually see a path from 174 -> 6939 (well 28 paths): 174 <many different 3-5 asn> 6939 <customer asn>
it's clearly not all of HE -> Cogent, and it's clearly not supposed to be working (I would think). -chris
-chris
Matt
Ah. Sorry, the changed subject line didn't thread in with this, so this showed up as an unreplied singleton in my inbox.
Apologies for the duplicated response; at least this won't be a lonely singleton in anyone else's inbox now. ^_^;
Matt
On 3/31/19 6:19 PM, Mike Leber wrote:
The routes you see are Cogent using IPv6 leaks.
We chase these down as we see them.
Obviously if Cogent is happy enough to use leaks, we could just give them our IPv6 customer routes directly. ;)
As a backbone operator, I'd prefer all routing we do (for at least the first hop leaving our network) to be intentional. Perhaps they are the same?
Should I wait for to get an interesting email? (haha)
Perhaps you should bake them a cake. :-) -- Jay Hennigan - jay@west.net Network Engineering - CCIE #7880 503 897-8550 - WB6RDV
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 6:40 PM Jay Hennigan <jay@west.net> wrote:
Perhaps you should bake them a cake. :-)
The cake was delicious and moist https://www.flickr.com/photos/mpetach/4031434206 "I'd like to buy a vowel. Can I get an 'e', pleas?" ^_^;;
Maybe I am just a tad bit illiterate on the the way a word on that cake can be spelled/used, but maybe Cogent doesn't want to peer with a provider that cannot spell.... :-\ plea /plē/ *noun* plural noun: *pleas* please /plēz/ *adverb* 1. 1. used in polite requests or questions. "please address letters to the Editor" On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:59 PM Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 6:40 PM Jay Hennigan <jay@west.net> wrote:
Perhaps you should bake them a cake. :-)
The cake was delicious and moist
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mpetach/4031434206
"I'd like to buy a vowel. Can I get an 'e', pleas?" ^_^;;
On 1/4/19 11:25 pm, Robert Webb wrote:
Maybe I am just a tad bit illiterate on the the way a word on that cake can be spelled/used, but maybe Cogent doesn't want to peer with a provider that cannot spell.... :-\
I like that theory. Explains why they don't peer with Google ("googol" being the correct spelling of the number) too.
Send them another cake… Owen
On Mar 31, 2019, at 18:19 , Mike Leber <mleber@he.net> wrote:
The routes you see are Cogent using IPv6 leaks.
We chase these down as we see them.
Obviously if Cogent is happy enough to use leaks, we could just give them our IPv6 customer routes directly. ;)
As a backbone operator, I'd prefer all routing we do (for at least the first hop leaving our network) to be intentional. Perhaps they are the same?
Should I wait for to get an interesting email? (haha)
Mike.
On 3/31/19 6:10 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 6:07 PM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
thread subject still says 'google and he', I don't think there's ever been problems between google/he for v6. I think there are some issues from cogent - > he over v6 :(
Looking at a sample AS6939 customer link I see no: ".* 174$" ".* 174 .*$"
routes in the bgp stream :(
Looking at a AS174 customer link session I see no: ".* 6939$" ".* 6939 .*"
routes in the bgp stream :( Apologies, I do actually see a path from 174 -> 6939 (well 28 paths): 174 <many different 3-5 asn> 6939 <customer asn>
it's clearly not all of HE -> Cogent, and it's clearly not supposed to be working (I would think). -chris
-chris
Matt
Ah. Sorry, the changed subject line didn't thread in with this, so this showed up as an unreplied singleton in my inbox.
Apologies for the duplicated response; at least this won't be a lonely singleton in anyone else's inbox now. ^_^;
Matt
On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 18:10:09 -0700, Christopher Morrow said:
Apologies, I do actually see a path from 174 -> 6939 (well 28 paths): 174 <many different 3-5 asn> 6939 <customer asn>
it's clearly not all of HE -> Cogent, and it's clearly not supposed to be working (I would think).
Wait, what? Are you saying that they refused to peer - and then failed at refusing? :)
On 3/31/19 8:21 PM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 18:10:09 -0700, Christopher Morrow said:
Apologies, I do actually see a path from 174 -> 6939 (well 28 paths): 174 <many different 3-5 asn> 6939 <customer asn>
it's clearly not all of HE -> Cogent, and it's clearly not supposed to be working (I would think).
Wait, what?
Are you saying that they refused to peer - and then failed at refusing? :)
Let them eat cake.
participants (11)
-
Bryan Holloway -
Christopher Morrow -
David Hubbard -
Jay Hennigan -
Julien Goodwin -
Matthew Petach -
Mike Leber -
Owen DeLong -
Randy Bush -
Robert Webb -
Valdis Klētnieks