Providers that carry IPv6

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?

701 (MCI) - ?
7018 (AT&T) - ?
1239 (Sprint) - ?
174 (Cogent) - No.
3356 (Level3) - ?
209 (Qwest) - No.
3549 (Global Crossing) - ?
4323 (Time Warner Telecom) - ?
6461 (Abovenet) - ?
7132 (SBC) - ?

Is there anyone out that would supply an ISP with a tunnel to v6 routes?

Eric Krichbaum, PhD
Director, Retail Network Engineering
Citynet
113 Platinum Drive, Suite B
Bridgeport WV 26330
Support: 800-881-2638
Fax: 304-848-5410
www.citynet.net

2

If I'm not wrong, you could get some service from MCI and AT&T, tunnels only
from SPRINT. Global Crossing provides service, as I believe Level3 and
Abovenet do.

You may want to do a free search for "ISP" at
http://www.ipv6-to-standard.org

Regards,
Jordi

3

:-> "Krichbaum," == Krichbaum, Eric <Eric.Krichbaum@admin.citynet.net> writes:

    > I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
    > have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
    > example?

    > 701 (MCI) - ?

yes, but from 12702 (at least in europe)

    > 7018 (AT&T) - ?

no

    > 1239 (Sprint) - ?

yes, but from 6175

    > 3356 (Level3) - ?

yes, although not available everywhere (as told by a friend who wanted
v6 at some particular datacenter and couldn't get it)

    > 3549 (Global Crossing) - ?

yes

    > 7132 (SBC) - ?

no

4

Krichbaum, Eric wrote:

I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?

http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/

You can check the routing tables for which ASN's are active or check
the DFP list to see if they have an, active, allocation.

Of course yelling at them that you want connectivity by calling their
head sales guy up is also a great thing.

There are a number of great transits who can provide you IPv6 transit,
Tiscali,Easynet,NTT/Verio come to mind amongst others (still early
here I might miss some good ones out). Check the above URL for more of
them.

Personally, I would give any participant in GRH a 'they are cool', for
the mere fact that they allow their routes to be published and thus
give an open view and clarity into their network.

Is there anyone out that would supply an ISP with a tunnel to v6 routes?

Please at least honor: ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt

Don't go tunneling around the world as some people still do :frowning:

Greets,
Jeroen

5

Antonio Querubin wrote:

Please at least honor: ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt

A typical trans-Pacific path is significantly longer than a typical
trans-Atlantic path. The < 40 ms policy recommendation in the above is
unrealistically small for those of us out here in the Pacific Ocean
where it takes roughly 50 ms just to reach only halfway across the
ocean. It also favors a system of short IPv6 paths through multiple
tunnels that add significant latency which is somewhat self-defeating.
Ideally you want an IPv6 path between point A and point B to be
reasonably close in latency to the IPv4 path.

That is indeed the intention of that document, therefor that "<40ms
policy" can be mostly ignored for that type of links.

In the absence of
ubiquitous, diverse, native IPv6 peering between Tier 1 providers, which
I suspect will still take a while to develop, currently the only
realistic way of keeping the latency delta minimized between an IPv4
path and an IPv6 path is to have your own diverse set of tunnels, even
if it means tunnels that go halfway around the world.

I don't see a real reason why one needs to tunnel around the world.
Unless you are indeed in a very remote location where no transit
provider is providing IPv6 yet. If that is still the case though I
definitely would suggest that you start kicking your current IPv4
transits *VERY* hard in several naughty places to get them going and
start providing it. At the very least they can do a tunnel over their
own infrastructure and terminate you at their ends.

The alternative
is IPv6 connectivity that really stinks because packets have to bounce
through multiple tunnels unnecessarilly.

Try to avoid that at all cost of course. But if that is the only way,
then for the time being that is then the only solution. Of course
document it properly and kick upstreams to fix it.

Greets,
Jeroen

6

In fact, we have two tunnels, one with MCI and one with SPRINT.
They're in "beta" state now, but we are getting 682 prefixes from MCI and
703 from SPRINT.

Regards,
Nicolas.

7

I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?

701 (MCI) - ?

Yes, although I don't know whether tunneled or not. I see 16 prefixes
through 701. 12702 (the IPv6 network of 702 - MCI Europe) is active as well
with native links on a few Exchange Points and tunneled inside.

7018 (AT&T) - ?

Visible. Has 2001:503:A83E::/48 (a.gtld-servers.net) connected for example.
Only visible through OCCAID though and as far as I've heard, no current
plans to peer up with other commercial players because migration is
still ongoing. Sad story ...

1239 (Sprint) - ?

Doing "experimental" IPv6 with AS6175 with a few tunnel boxes in US and
Europe. Not really a decent IPv6 routing policy though, they seem to be
giving out all prefixes they have on all sessions (fulltable swapper)
and are depreffed by a number of people due to that. Besides the
performance is not really too great, traffic tends to go detours
especially when you enter their network in Europe.

174 (Cogent) - No.

Correct.

3356 (Level3) - ?

IIRC two tunnel boxes in Europe (Amsterdam and London) and quite some
customers there, for example GEANT2 and thus about all european NRENs.
As far as I heard they have started native IPv6 deployment in US using
6PE now, no idea about availability.

209 (Qwest) - No.

At least one customer (AS11588 aka Highwinds Network Group, Inc.), but
not visible very well. From my location they are visible through
Abilene. Hm, why is a commercial player a downstream of Abilene again?

3549 (Global Crossing) - ?

Yes, very good network, native availability almost everywhere. Aside
from rare occasions where a MPLS tunnel to an old router is broken
(which usually gets fixed within a few hours) no issues at all, good
performance, decent routing. Would be my choice from your list.

4323 (Time Warner Telecom) - ?

Nothing.

6461 (Abovenet) - ?

Nothing.

7132 (SBC) - ?

nothing.

Other very good IPv6 networks with at least partial US coverage are NTT
(AS2914), C&W (AS1273) and Tiscali (AS3257).

Is there anyone out that would supply an ISP with a tunnel to v6 routes?

Kick you upstreams and give them incentive to deploy IPv6.

Regards,
Bernhard

8

Hi,

This might change things a bit..... (not immediately, of course...)

5 Telcoms Win GSA Contract

http://www.photonics.com/content/news/2007/June/1/87860.aspx

WASHINGTON, June 1, 2007 -- AT&T, Level 3, MCI, Qwest and Sprint were awarded telecommunications contracts worth up to $20 billion over 10 years by the US General Services Administration (GSA), the agency announced Thursday.

Cheers,