Re: Spectrum networks IPv6 access issue

[Shawn L via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

We know the feeling well. Try porting from them…..


> On May 2, 2023, at 4:41 PM, Daniel Marks via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:
>
> My issue was just trying to convince Spectrum to look into the problem in the first place, I brought the Atlas probe 
> receipts because it’s such a helpful tool, but wasn’t able to get through to anyone helpful (acct mgr, noc email, 
> even the escalation list) until I started lighting fires filing FCC complaints and using social media (which 
> thankfully worked).
>
> Not sure how accurate it is (I hope it isn’t), but some of the techs I spoke to said a lot of the internal tooling 
> for troubleshooting is incapable of dealing with IPv6, so they weren’t able to do things like run traceroutes to 
> confirm what I was seeing. My guess is that this issue was caught in a catch-22 where they needed impossible to 
> obtain proof on their end to escalate to a team who can actually deal with the issue.
>
> Sucks for us folk who went all in on v6 only to find out not even the ISP can help us. 
>
> -Daniel Marks
>
> > On May 2, 2023, at 15:36, Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net> wrote:
> >
> > 
> >
> > > > On May 2, 2023, at 2:43 PM, Daniel Marks via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:
> > >
> > > This has been “resolved", I finally got through to some awesome engineer at Spectrum who has rerouted traffic while 
> > > they work with their hardware vendor (thanks Jake):
> >
> >
> > One of the tools that I’ve used in the past is the RIPE Atlas service to measure these things.  It’s helped me 
> > isolate IP space reachability issues for new announcements, because you can get enough of a random sample of hosts 
> > to isolate things, and enough data about that endpoint to launch follow-up measurements.
> >
> > - Jared