nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 21:37:10 -0800
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? randy
Does that remain true for values of A where A is willing to peer with B, but B refuses to peer with A? Owen
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 Cogent vs Hurricane Electric Matt Palmer (Dec 03)
- 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)