The IPv6 connectivity problems, at least the ones that I and some
others encountered, where resolved yesterday.
Thanks to all the folks involved who made that happen!
Mike Leber wrote:
[..]
Would you similarly disconnect a nonresponsive customer because they used
a /30 from RFC1918 space on a point to point link with you?
That link should not have existed in the first place. Also RPF filters
would catch any packets being sourced from that block.
[..]
Of course, Neustar, who are hosting www.ietf.org, might also want to
look for a couple of extra transit providers who can provide them with
real connectivity to the rest of the world.
That won't renumber Bill Manning's links if that is the problem you are
trying to fix.
Not much to fix when the person in question doesn't want to fix it.
That comment was more meant to point that Neustar should have multiple
upstreams.
[..]
BTW, Jeroen does have a valid beef, ipv6(_at_)he(_dot_)net used to not be
handled by our normal engineering staff. It was somebody's part
time side project. This has changed with the migration of our IPv6
network into our core. Since IPv6 is available via all core routers
for customers on the same links as their IPv4 connection, all
Hurricane network engineers are now required to be able take care
of issues with it.
That is great to hear, keep the good work coming!
Greets,
Jeroen
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf