nanog mailing list archives

Re: Cogent IPv6

From: ML <ml () kenweb org>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 08:50:49 -0400

On 6/9/2011 4:39 AM, Tom Hill wrote:

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 23:39 -0400, ML wrote:

Did Cogent have the gumption to charge you more for IPv6 too?


We have a bit of transit from them (~20Mbit or so) to stay connected to
their customers.

Getting IPv6 setup was really simple. No extra charges. It's been easier
than via our existing L3 reseller (Adapt).

Tom

I guess someone with a >1 Gb commit in a not so small city deserves tobe charged extra for a few Mbps of IPv6...


For a not so full table at that.

Current thread:

Re: IPv6 routing protocols, (continued)
- - - Re: IPv6 routing protocols Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 10)
    - Re: IPv6 routing protocols Owen DeLong (Jun 10)
    - Re: IPv6 routing protocols Xiaoliang Zhao (Jun 10)
    - Re: Cogent IPv6 Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 09)
    - Re: Cogent IPv6 Owen DeLong (Jun 09)
    - Re: Cogent IPv6 Ray Soucy (Jun 09)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Chris Russell (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 Ask Bjørn Hansen (Jun 08)
- Re: Cogent IPv6 ML (Jun 08)
  - Re: Cogent IPv6 Tom Hill (Jun 09)
    - Re: Cogent IPv6 ML (Jun 09)
    - Re: Cogent IPv6 Jeff Wheeler (Jun 09)
    - RE: Cogent IPv6 Dennis Burgess (Jun 09)
    - Re: Cogent IPv6 Jeroen Wunnink (Jun 10)