Le mercredi 10 mars 2010 à 11:18 -0800, Seth Mattinen a écrit :

On 3/10/10 11:00 AM, Charles Mills wrote:

...

Does anyone have a list of carriers who are IPv6 capable today?

I would assume this would be rolled out in larger cities first but anything outside of "testbed environments" and "trials" as in Comcast's recent announcement seems to be all that is available.

I'm being tasked with coming up with an IPv6 migration plan for a data center.

Mostly interested in if ATT, Level3, GLBX, Saavis, Verizon Business and Qwest are capable as those are the typical ones I deal with.

Ones I have personal experience with:

GLBX - yes SAVVIS - no VZB - yes, good luck ATT - "Beginning in 1Q2010 MIS will provide the ability to support IPv6 in a dual stack mode."

When I disconnected my SAVVIS circuit in November 2009 I explicitly told them IPv6 was a deciding factor. Not all of Verizon's pops are IPv6 enabled, which may cause you trouble ordering it. It's put me in month 11 of trying to turn up a dual-stack circuit because they refuse to read the order and keep putting it in Sacramento (v4 only) when it needs to go to San Jose (dual-stack). Sprint wasn't on your list, but they are rolling out native IPv6 support on all of 1239. I've been using their 6175 testbed since 2005.

+ Tata AS6453, production network since quite some time now, dual stack. mh

~Seth

-- michael hallgren, mh2198-ripe

On 3/11/10 9:01 AM, Chris Woodfield wrote:

To pile on in the spirit of "if people don't complain, nothing will change" - is VZB still insisting on filtering >/32 at their peers? While ARIN is allocating /40s and /48s directly?

As far as I know, yes. ~Seth

TJ wrote:

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Chris Woodfield <rekoil@semihuman.com>wrote:

...

To pile on in the spirit of "if people don't complain, nothing will change" - is VZB still insisting on filtering >/32 at their peers? While ARIN is allocating /40s and /48s directly?

I believe so ... will be even more impactful as LTE gets deployed.

Another nit - They are also blocking Protocol41 on their EV-DO network. While this is a 'noble, if poorly thought out, effort' to prevent IPv6 from impacting their cel phone users - it kind of messes up those of us who have aircards (and got used to 6to4 for quick and dirty IPv6 connectivity).

If you want quick&dirty then 6to4 is not going to help you in most cases anyway, as you are mostly landing behind a NAT, as such Teredo (miredo on non-windows boxes) is a way out and there is of course TSP which can run over TSP and AYIYA. For some magical reason I prefer the last ;) Also note that is it is their network, they can filter all they want, just like you do you in your own. (How did you btw determine that it is filtered, maybe the 6to4 packets are just not coming back from a broken relay somewhere, that is very hard to determine) Greets, Jeroen

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:54 PM, TJ <trejrco@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Chris Woodfield <rekoil@semihuman.com>wrote:

...

To pile on in the spirit of "if people don't complain, nothing will change" - is VZB still insisting on filtering >/32 at their peers? While ARIN is allocating /40s and /48s directly?

I believe so ... will be even more impactful as LTE gets deployed.

how so exactly?? LTE is really just a 'last mile' tech... whether it's v4 or v6 doesnt' seem to matter (to the fact that it's LTE)

Another nit - They are also blocking Protocol41 on their EV-DO network.

<cough>vzw not vzb</cough>

While this is a 'noble, if poorly thought out, effort' to prevent IPv6 from impacting their cel phone users - it kind of messes up those of us who have aircards (and got used to 6to4 for quick and dirty IPv6 connectivity).

there are other carriers ya know?

-----Original Message----- From: Seth Mattinen [mailto:sethm@rollernet.us] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 2:19 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 enabled carriers? On 3/10/10 11:00 AM, Charles Mills wrote:

Does anyone have a list of carriers who are IPv6 capable today?

<snip> Sprint wasn't on your list, but they are rolling out native IPv6 support on all of 1239. I've been using their 6175 testbed since 2005. ~Seth Not trying to make a big shameless plug here, but I thought I should at least confirm this to be true. Mostly domestic until ~mid-year, limited port availability in the next couple of months, more sites and port speeds available as the year and the rollout progresses. www.sprintv6.net or your Sprint sales droid will have updates as they're available. Thanks, Wes _________________________________ Wesley George Sprint Core Network Engineering - IP O:703-689-7505 M:703-864-4902 http://www.sprint.net This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel Company proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.

Does anyone have a list of carriers who are IPv6 capable today?

I would assume this would be rolled out in larger cities first but anything outside of "testbed environments" and "trials" as in Comcast's recent announcement seems to be all that is available.

I'm being tasked with coming up with an IPv6 migration plan for a data

We have a dual-stack 10G link to XO here in Seattle so they are doing it as well... Savvis is not doing v6 yet either so far as I know, we are going to make that an issue at our next renewal. I am told that level3 is working on a full dual-stack roll-out currently and that it should be available "soon" and will replace the current tunneled options they have. Thanks, John van Oppen Spectrum Networks (AS11404) -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 11:19 AM To: Charles Mills Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 enabled carriers? On Mar 10, 2010, at 2:00 PM, Charles Mills wrote: center.

Mostly interested in if ATT, Level3, GLBX, Saavis, Verizon Business and Qwest are capable as those are the typical ones I deal with.

I believe most of the ones you've listed have service offerings in various stages of availability. You should be able to pop over here: telnet route-views.equinix.routeviews.org and take a look at the table easily enough to determine what providers have it enabled. Some have been operating with a different ASN for a number of years, including ATT and Sprint. If you're not feeding route-views, and are IPv6 enabled, please do. It helps those interested in routing research and is a valuable community asset. - Jared

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Chris Grundemann wrote:

SixXS maintains a list here: http://www.sixxs.net/faq/connectivity/?faq=ipv6transit.

I think that list should also include TeliaSonera. TSIC does offer v6 transit, although their product sheet only mentions IPv4. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

Owen DeLong wrote: [..]

Hurricane Electric has a full production dual-stack environment.

...

I'm being tasked with coming up with an IPv6 migration plan for a data center.

Mostly interested in if ATT, Level3, GLBX, Saavis, Verizon Business and Qwest are capable as those are the typical ones I deal with.

To the best of my knowledge, each of those has varying degrees of IPv6 availability and none is "full production product" yet. My information could be old.

Always fun to read how people who work for some place (you might want to use either your work address or actually disclose directly why you are pimping something) like to bash their competition else while they run a 'full production' network without providing true arguments to counter that, nevertheless lets take a look at that "full production network": 3 10g-3-2.core1.sjc2.ipv6.he.net (2001:470:0:3c::1) 66.649 ms 66.555 ms 66.511 ms 4 10g-3-2.core1.pao1.ipv6.he.net (2001:470:0:32::2) 59.644 ms 62.214 ms 62.164 ms 5 3ffe:80a::b2 (3ffe:80a::b2) 61.770 ms 62.135 ms 62.506 ms 6 hitachi1.otemachi.wide.ad.jp (2001:200:0:4401::3) 182.958 ms 181.156 ms 181.346 ms 7 2001:200:0:1c04::251 (2001:200:0:1c04::251) 183.827 ms 181.617 ms 181.554 ms Yes, 6bone is still alive (sing along to that well known Portal tune ;) I, and others, have mentioned that problem already several times since 2006-06-06, you know the day that 6bone got shut down. It is also still amazing that "full production networks" are not able to do proper uRPF or let alone IRR based filtering as in that case you would not even see that nonsense... Also if you are running such a "full production network" you might want to disclose the traffic levels that you do. Or is there something to hide there? Thus: please actually FINALLY fix your "full production network" by finally renumbering at PAIX. You are peering with other folks, thus you know who is on the other side, as such, after 4 years, you might want to finally move on from this 6bone space and possibly deploy uRPF. Then again, you'll notice those traffic levels one day when you will go into history as the source of the first large spoofed DoS attack against whatever truly important service. Thanks for your attention. Greets, Jeroen (who has no true ISP hat ;)