Re: ipv6 transit over tunneled connection

["Michael K. Smith - Adhost" <mksmith () adhost com>]

I have both Level3 and NTT v6 connections and there are no additional
charges for the service.  I recall NTT had one a few years ago, but I
think that's fallen by the wayside.

Mike
--
Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP
Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksmith () adhost com
w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050
PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3  08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D)





On 2/17/11 7:01 PM, "Jack Carrozzo" <jack () crepinc com> wrote:

> We pick up v6 from HE currently (like the rest of the world). L3 offered
> us
> dual stack also, but they wanted money to set it up plus MRC. None of our
> Bits That Matter (tm) go over v6 anyhow. (I guess the right phrase would
> be
> "revenue producing bits").
>
> -Jack Carrozzo
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Eric Van Tol <eric () atlantech net> wrote:
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared () puck nether net]
> > > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 2:49 PM
> > > To: Jack Carrozzo
> > > Cc: nanog () nanog org
> > > Subject: Re: ipv6 transit over tunneled connection
> > >
> > > I'm curious what providers have not gotten their IPv6
> > > plans/networks/customer ports enabled.
> > >
> > > I know that Comcast is doing their trials now (Thanks John!) and will
> > be
> > > presenting at the upcoming NANOG about their experiences.
> > >
> > > What parts of the big "I" Internet are not enabled or ready?
> >
> > We don't see Savvis, Level3, or AboveNet with IPv6 capabilities in our
> > region (DC).  Two years ago, neither Verizon or AT&T had IPv6, either.
> > Not
> > sure about them now, as we no longer use them for transit.  One would
> > think
> > everyone would have v6 capabilities in the heart of government
> > territory,
> > but okay.
> >
> > For whatever reason, Verio actually charges (or used to) for their IPv6
> > separately from IPv4 and to top it all off, it wasn't significantly
> > discounted.
> >
> > -evt