Does anyone here has clues on IPv6 support via Charter? We recently got BGP
up on the connection and they denied for IPv6 support for now. Support
engineer gave expected time of something like end of year which seems very
late as per our plans.
Is situation same for everyone who sits in downstream of Charter?
Also, does it makes sense to go for BGP Tunnel for now? I just setup IPv6
Tunnel via Hurricane Electric. Latency seems pretty much OK ~ 10-15ms of
overhead. Yet to test other parameters. I heard Tunnels are usually bad.
Can someone tell how to test this tunnel setup to confirm if there is a
performance issue or not? I am thinking of writing a quick bash script and
run via cron to test latency, packet loss and bandwidth throughput for
couple of days. If anyone has better idea, please let me know.
We (Charter) are planning on starting early field trials with our business customers with IPv6 real soon (within Q2). We have a few customers already identified, but would you be interested in participating with us?
Jim Rampley | Principal Engineer | 314-543-2505
12405 Powerscourt Drive, St. Louis, MO 63131
Also, does it makes sense to go for BGP Tunnel for now? I just setup IPv6
Tunnel via Hurricane Electric. Latency seems pretty much OK ~ 10-15ms of
overhead. Yet to test other parameters. I heard Tunnels are usually bad.
Can someone tell how to test this tunnel setup to confirm if there is a
performance issue or not? I am thinking of writing a quick bash script and
run via cron to test latency, packet loss and bandwidth throughput for
couple of days. If anyone has better idea, please let me know.
Also using a HE.net BGP tunnel for our IPv6, simply because having just 1 native provider with Ipv6 isn't redundant. That and it's 8mbit.
The v4 connection which the tunnel connects over is 90mbit, and the tunnel needs to travel from NL to DE for the FRA BGP peering.
I'm getting about 40mbit through the IPv6 tunnel, so i'd say it works well, although the throughput has slowly been dropping to the 30's range over the last 6 months. But that's probably because of the latency.
For something that is provided for free I'm really glad we have it.
I should have peered with their UK PoP as it's much closer by latency, thus faster.
HE does a fine job with their IPv6 tunnels. If they're you're only v6
connectivity or you need them to provide a backup IPv6 route for when
sole native v6 provider goes down, they're a superb choice.
However...
Do not, do not, do not, rig your system to prefer tunneled IPvanything
to native IPvanythingelse. For all of the obvious reasons.
If you publish an IPv6 address for www.anuragbhatia.com, clients with
IPv6 will use that IPv6 address in preference to the address published
for IPv4. If your sole IPv6 access is with a tunnel, don't publish an
IPv6 address for www. Publish the IPv6 address under www6.anuragbhatia.com instead. And on your mail server, have the
second MX point to a name with a AAAA, and let the first MX stay on
v4.
I just did a test from Eu based server sitting below EU based HE Tunnel
node by downloading Ubuntu release file from US based server. This does not
tells about possible high speed but surely tells what is available atleast.
Server itself is sitting on M-Online with 100Mbps pipe.
I'm getting about 40mbit through the IPv6 tunnel, so i'd say it works well, although the throughput has slowly been dropping to the 30's range over the last 6 months. But that's probably because of the latency.
For something that is provided for free I'm really glad we have it.
Indeed. It's pretty amazing what HE has put together.
I should have peered with their UK PoP as it's much closer by latency, thus faster.
Why don't you? Can you setup more then one peering?
He.net tunnels are also good to have because depending on your provider,
there's still many with incomplete views of the ipv6 routing table and he
might have a path. This is a more prevalent issue with ipv6 than v4 at the
moment.
This is a big problem for the two providers involved in this "spat" having
inconsistent IPv4/IPv6 business relationships (peering, etc).
There are many professional service providers that will happily dual-stack
your internet port with consistent business relationships. Don't let these
two parties that so far have agreed to disagree prevent you from using IPv6
to its fullest. Select another carrier.
I know that the following IPv4 as-paths appear to enumerate transit paths where the providers can do IPv6 transit as well.
If HE does not take advantage of those existing IP transit connections for whichever IP version I'm not sure where I would cast blame. Perhaps those ports don't have IPv6. I have my own opinions about peering disputes which you can obtain privately.