nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric
From: joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2015 10:38:33 -0800
On 12/5/15 9:37 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Dec 4, 2015, at 17:43 , Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:Or, if you feel that Cogent's stubborn insistence on partitioning the global v6 internetif A does not peer with B, then for all A and B they are evil partitioners? can we lower the rhetoric? randyDoes that remain true for values of A where A is willing to peer with B, but B refuses to peer with A?
These are (mostly) reasonable business decisions engaged by (mostly) reasonable actors. both providers have tools available to them to address the partition unilaterally as one of them does in ipv4 where they so inclined. Neither provider has significant numbers of single homed eyeballs marooned behind them which would be bad.
Owen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Jared Mauch (Dec 03)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Randy Bush (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Matthew Petach (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Randy Bush (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Baldur Norddahl (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Paul S. (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Josh Reynolds (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Paul S. (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric William Herrin (Dec 04)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Owen DeLong (Dec 05)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric joel jaeggli (Dec 06)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Marty Strong via NANOG (Dec 06)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Matthew Petach (Dec 06)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Baldur Norddahl (Dec 06)