Well, on reading it, it's more an "IPv6: It's great -- ask for
it by name!" piece.
Cheers,
-- jra
I'm dealing with Hughsnet and have observed the following issue/
SOA is me for testing 72.169.156.122
Upstream router seems to be a public IP
Number: 15942
Time: 23:03:21
Product: FireWall-1
Interface: eth0
Origin: rockgate (192.168.1.1)
Type: Log
Action: Accept
Protocol: udp
Service: 2016
Source: upstream_router (72.169.156.121)
Destination: Firewall_external (72.169.156.122)
Rule: 10
Source Port: domain-udp (53)
Problem is that target port is not 53, in otherwords asking for a DNS
response on an odd port while sourcing port 53.
Is this normal, am I missing something that a bigger ISP knows? This would
be Hughesnet. so I should be concerned? I have a ticket opened with them,
#15048812 but am getting the run around with them.
I understand that the normal recourse is to "Reboot the modem" but in this
case I think it's a bit more than that.
Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks in advance,
Again sorry for the noise
Joe Blanchard
906-384=6525
Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
Well, on reading it, it's more an "IPv6: It's great -- ask for
it by name!" piece.
This article reminded me that I really needed to stop relying on a tunnel over my backup DSL line for IPv6 and spend the time to get my own ISP on the road to deploying IPv6.
Step 1: Request address space from ARIN
Took <1 day to get a reply that we'd be getting the space that day, a few more hours to receive a /32. That was easy.
Step 2: Get set up for IPv6 peering and transit
Took 30 minutes for Equinix to tell me that all I need to do is fill out a form and I'm all set. Even quicker than ARIN.
Took a little over 2 days for my transit provider (Abovenet) to tell me that they don't offer IPv6 transit and don't know when they will.
Native IPv6 isn't important enough for me to spend money on a new transit provider on yet, so I guess maybe next year we'll try this again and see what's changed. In the meantime, I need to upgrade some routers (including some that went EOL before IPv6 support came along) anyway.
Matthew Kaufman
Matthew Kaufman wrote:
Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
This article reminded me that I really needed to stop relying on a tunnel over my backup DSL line for IPv6 and spend the time to get my own ISP on the road to deploying IPv6.
Step 1: Request address space from ARIN
Took <1 day to get a reply that we'd be getting the space that day, a few more hours to receive a /32. That was easy.
Did you have existing IPv4 space with ARIN? If so, I have to wonder if I would get the same speedy service from ARIN as a new entrant without existing ipv4 space? 
I'm looking at building a large network with Ipv6 in the Los Angeles metro area, to serve a number of small businesses via a large scale wireless network. Essentially a large scale private WAN, with globally routable addresses (for a VoIP/IPTV roll out later) So I'm not exactly a traditional ISP or colocation customer, but share characteristics with them. Does this matter? Should I just submit my request and see what happens?
Well, funny you should say that.
I'm a masochist, so next week, I'm going to look into getting L3 to
extend native IPv6 down my 10Mb/s uplink.
My edge machines are Linux 2.6.mumble, but the one that faces L3 is at
the end of another 10Mb/s tail circuit to me from a colo cage, so it's
going to be Even More Fun.
Has anyone already done the Edge IPv6 dance with L3?
Cheers,
-- jra
I've been meaning to do this too for some time...only our GigE circuit to L3 was going into cisco gear with no v6 support. We moved the circuit recently to a Sup720-3bxl...so in theory, we should be able to turn up v6 with them. How painful should that be? We do already have our own v6 /32 and of course are doing ipv4 BGP with them.
Here is the response I got from L3 when I inquired about IPV6:
"The answer to your questions is "no", we have not yet inplemented IPV6 for our customers yet. IPV4 is the de facto on our backbone nad alledge router on which customers connectc."
Poor spelling aside, it seems they have not implemented it yet. If someone manages to get them to implement, I would really like to hear about it.
-kyle
Kyle Murray
Network Manager
Digital Forest, Inc.
Jon Lewis wrote:
No native service available but there is a trial tunneled IPv6 service with best effort support with *no SLA* available to current Level 3 Internet customers. IPv6 is currently being provided via IPv4 tunnels to the customer's existing router and supported by a handful of engineers.
There is a simple service agreement addendum and form to fill out for relevant config bits.
-Craig
That's good to know. Do you know if there are any rate-limits that would apply to this trial service? Any idea where the tunnel head-end is? Will they do a backup tunnel to another router? I'll have to give them a holler as soon as I'm ready to make the IPv6 jump.
Thanks
Justin
Craig Pierantozzi wrote:
No rate limits, tunnel termination in DC, San Jose, Dallas,
Amsterdam, London. You can request termination to multiple
routers for diversity.
* Justin Shore was thought to have said:
wow that is odd.. since stewart bamford has been off giving ipv6
deployment talks to various conferences (including this one:
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/bamford.html )
maybe L3's support staff should check their internal documentation??
Slide 17 says: "Deployment completed Q3 2005"... so, they apparently
have it, can get it to you and do 6PE (or did 6PE a bit ago). Maybe
ask again and aim the nay-sayer to the nanog preso and ask them to
call stewart up directly?
-chris
wow that is odd.. since stewart bamford has been off giving ipv6
deployment talks to various conferences (including this one:
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/bamford.html )
It might be odd but its consistent. I had the response that there is no native support for transit, but there are some "customer trials" using tunnels.
maybe L3's support staff should check their internal documentation??
Slide 17 says: "Deployment completed Q3 2005"... so, they apparently
have it, can get it to you and do 6PE (or did 6PE a bit ago). Maybe
ask again and aim the nay-sayer to the nanog preso and ask them to
call stewart up directly?
In the end, we talked to he.net that was a far simpler process
Christopher Morrow wrote:
I'm looking at building a large network with Ipv6 in the Los
Angeles metro area, to serve a number of small businesses via
a large scale wireless network. Essentially a large scale
private WAN, with globally routable addresses (for a
VoIP/IPTV roll out later) So I'm not exactly a traditional
ISP or colocation customer, but share characteristics with
them. Does this matter? Should I just submit my request and
see what happens?
Yes, you should just submit your request and see what happens.
If there isn't enough documentation or you filled out something
incorrectly, ARIN generally contacts you and explains what you
need to provide in order to justify your request. It is pretty
painless really. At worst, because your business model is out
of the ordinary, you might spend a week or two going back and
forth explaining things.
--Michael Dillon
Christopher Morrow wrote:
www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/bamford.html )
maybe L3's support staff should check their internal documentation??
Slide 17 says: "Deployment completed Q3 2005"... so, they apparently
have it, can get it to you and do 6PE (or did 6PE a bit ago). Maybe
ask again and aim the nay-sayer to the nanog preso and ask them to
call stewart up directly?We had the same issue when we inquired initially. Apparently Level(1)
support at Level(3) has Level(0) clue as to their capabilities.
This is, sadly, not different from a bunch of ISP's (I think vzb is
still in a wierd state where getting their sales/install/support folks
to put v6 on your link is harder than it ought to be)
I responded to Kyle off-list as to the email address for getting to the
people with the answers. Stewart is still on the team and they had us up
and running on IPv6 within a couple of days once I contacted the right
people.
hurray! what's the email address so other folks searching might be
able to find it? Looking at the ARIN contact info for: 2001:1900::/32
doesn't produce something that seems ipv6 specific (which is probably
good).
-chris
This is, sadly, not different from a bunch of ISP's (I think
vzb is still in a wierd state where getting their
sales/install/support folks to put v6 on your link is harder
than it ought to be)> I responded to Kyle off-list as to the email address for getting to
> the people with the answers. Stewart is still on the team and they
> had us up and running on IPv6 within a couple of days once
I contacted
> the right people.hurray!
might be able to find it?
Please go to the ARIN IPv6 wiki and add any ISP contact info to this
page:
<ARIN IPv6 Wiki - ARIN's Vault
--Michael Dillon