On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Krichbaum, Eric wrote:
I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?
701 (MCI) - ?
7018 (ATT) - ?
1239 (Sprint) - ?
174 (Cogent) - No.
3356 (Level3) - ?
209 (Qwest) - No.
I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?
701 (MCI) - ?
7018 (ATT) - ?
1239 (Sprint) - ?
174 (Cogent) - No.
3356 (Level3) - ?
209 (Qwest) - No.
3549 (Global Crossing) - ?
4323 (Time Warner
:- Krichbaum, == Krichbaum, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?
701 (MCI) - ?
yes, but from 12702 (at least in europe)
7018
Krichbaum, Eric wrote:
I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?
http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/
You can check the routing tables for which ASN's are active or check
the DFP list to see
Antonio Querubin wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Please at least honor: ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt
A typical trans-Pacific path is significantly longer than a typical
trans-Atlantic path. The 40 ms policy recommendation in the above is
unrealistically
Krichbaum, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I saw this question a while ago but no (maybe one) answers. Who does
have IPv6 in production today. Of the fixedorbit.com top ten for
example?
701 (MCI) - ?
Yes, although I don't know whether tunneled or not. I see 16 prefixes
through 701. 12702
