Re: Did IPv6 between HE and Google ever get resolved?

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

Send them another cake…

Owen


> On Mar 31, 2019, at 18:19 , Mike Leber <mleber () he net> wrote:
>
> The routes you see are Cogent using IPv6 leaks.
>
> We chase these down as we see them.
>
> Obviously if Cogent is happy enough to use leaks, we could just give
> them our IPv6 customer routes directly.  ;)
>
> As a backbone operator, I'd prefer all routing we do (for at least the
> first hop leaving our network) to be intentional.  Perhaps they are the
> same?
>
> Should I wait for to get an interesting email?  (haha)
>
> Mike.
>
>
> On 3/31/19 6:10 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 6:07 PM Christopher Morrow
> > <morrowc.lists () gmail com> wrote:
> > > thread subject still says 'google and he', I don't think there's ever
> > > been problems between google/he for v6.
> > > I think there are some issues from cogent - > he over v6 :(
> > >
> > > Looking at a sample AS6939 customer link I see no:
> > >  ".* 174$"
> > >  ".* 174 .*$"
> > >
> > > routes in the bgp stream :(
> > >
> > > Looking at a AS174 customer link session I see no:
> > >  ".* 6939$"
> > >  ".* 6939 .*"
> > >
> > > routes in the bgp stream :(
> > Apologies, I do actually see a path from 174 -> 6939 (well 28 paths):
> >  174 <many different 3-5 asn> 6939 <customer asn>
> >
> > it's clearly not all of HE -> Cogent, and it's clearly not supposed to
> > be working (I would think).
> > -chris
> >
> > > -chris
> > >
> > > > > Matt
> > > > Ah.  Sorry, the changed subject line didn't thread in with this,
> > > > so this showed up as an unreplied singleton in my inbox.
> > > >
> > > > Apologies for the duplicated response; at least this won't
> > > > be a lonely singleton in anyone else's inbox now.  ^_^;
> > > >
> > > > Matt