Hello People
i have one question:
why SIXXS is very strict like that ?
forcing a special address format is a idiotic work
everyone have a format of address
everyone have his way of saying address
every country have there language.
there's bilion of address definition at this time.
signed up for Sixxs for 2 times and resulted in a refuse because of bad address
Sixxs, please would you revise your requiremant ?
Emailed you for one month and still have no reply ?
did you has a coppy of my passport ?
did you saw my identity card ?
have you called me ?
anyway, i have realy not seen any Strict service like you, SIXXS.
i can evean pay for your service, if you wish.
just fix your policy and by nice with people like everyone is.
Thank you.
Meftah Tayeb
IT Consulting
http://www.tmvoip.com/
phone: +21321656139
Mobile: +213660347746
__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
ok, that's a positive answer.
but let me ask you a question:
do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?
that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !
4 189 ms 134 ms 99 ms 10gigabitethernet7-4.core1.nyc4.he.net
[2001:470:0:3e::1]
5 131 ms 152 ms 111 ms 2001:470:0:202::2
6 144 ms 147 ms 238 ms 2001:1900:19:7::4
7 132 ms 241 ms 143 ms vl-4060.car2.NewYork2.Level3.net
[2001:1900:4:1::fe]
[Jitter is my cable connection, not reflective of the performance of
HEs network]
As for cogent - Does anyone really care? this is only a problem for
reaching a single homed network behind cogent, and anyone running such
a network knows that their IPv6 connectivity doesn't work properly
anyway and they are the broken ones.
Whatever you think of the issues surrounding the peering dispute (I am
sure at least comcast agree with cogent that a Tier 1 network should
pay what is essentially a Tier 2 network for peering!), the fact
remains that HE did get there first with their defacto tier 1 status,
and for the time being at least "working IPv6" is realistically
"working IPv6 connection to HE and peers".
The more users/content that is behind HE and peers that is not
reachable from cogent the better, as it puts more pressure on them to
start behaving themselves and peering properly like everyone else.
- Mike
Good thinking mike
i do have a VoIp carrier single homed with Cogent.
any solution?
(*NO IPV4!*)
Pim Van,
i am just looking for a alternative way.
i don't need this stupid SixXs at all anymore.
also, Pim, are you Pim for Multicast? no IGMP? 
Thank you
I concur in all respects with your assessment of SIXXS. Being a
volunteer does not give you carte-blanche to act like the rear end of a
horse. I don't care if your service is free, your behavior is slowing,
not speeding the adoption of IPv6. Grow up.
Andrew
Sure. Make sure you have alternate plans for when Cogent gets into another
peering tiff. Not *if*, but *when*. And you probably want to have a long,
detailed, technical discussion with your Voip carrier about what *they* intend
to do when Cogent gets into a peering tiff.
And while you're at it, see if you can find out what *other* surprises their
network design has in it - I'm willing to bet a large pizza with everything but
anchovies that "single homed with Cogent" is *not* the only massive deficiency
in their network - it's probably the equivalent of finding a brown M&M backstage
at a Van Halen concert...
(Yes, there's corner cases where "single homing to a Tier-1" makes business
sense, if the pipe is really cheap and you can survive the revenue hit caused
by a routing/peering spat. I don't think "VOIP carrier" is one of those corner
cases)