nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent IPv6
From: Martin Millnert <millnert () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:17:39 -0400
Nick, On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Nick Olsen <nick () flhsi com> wrote:
I'm sure someone here is doing IPv6 peering with cogent.
(snip)
Any things to be aware of before pulling the trigger on it? (Other then them not having connectivity to HE's IPv6 side of things, Wish they would fix that already...)
Not just HE's prefixes you miss with Cogent. Lack of full table means they can't be considered a full transit, ie, you need something like minimum 2 full transits + cogent to do v6 properly. They're more like a private peering. Cheers, Martin
Current thread:
- Cogent IPv6 Nick Olsen (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Mark Radabaugh (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Martin Millnert (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 ryan (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jun 08)
- RE: Cogent IPv6 Kelly Setzer (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 William Herrin (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Chris Adams (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Aftab Siddiqui (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Jack Bates (Jun 09)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 William Herrin (Jun 09)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Jack Bates (Jun 09)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Joel Jaeggli (Jun 09)