Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Peering Disputes Migrate To IPv6

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the square-peg-and-deliberate-round-hole dept.

1sockchuck writes "As more networks prepare for the transition to IPv6, we're seeing the first peering disputes (sometimes known as 'Internet partitions') involving IPv6 connectivity. The dispute involves Cogent, which has previously been involved in high-profile IPv4 peering spats with Sprint, Level 3 and Telia. Hurricane Electric, which has been an early adopter on IPv6, says Cogent won't peer with it over IPv6. Hurricane has extended an olive branch by baking a cake bearing a message of outreach for Cogent."

6 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Re:ob. by Interoperable · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It had to happen that this would be posted when the article went up. It's done now. We can avoid any more Portal references for the rest of the discussion.

    --
    So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
  2. Transition going well... by freak132 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems that the IPv6 transition is going well; we've migrated peering disputes to the lovely next generation protocol.

  3. Re:Go peer with google instead by nnet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    like everything else google, ipv6 is in beta :)

  4. Re:I wouldn't peer with HE either.... by teknopurge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    An SLA won't show it - latency reports will. Yes, we have plenty of them. Also yes, there are many ISPs that offer QoS for IP traffic. (including us)

    --
    Website Hosting
  5. Re:Oh great, Cogent is at it again by sjames · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is true and quite silly all at once. Given network A and B with where B is full of servers that want to serve content (and ads of course) and A is full of clients that want to view that content, both networks have been paid by their customers to complete those transactions and both are failing to honor their agreements if they don't do it.

    On one hand, I see what you mean about it always being Cogent involved, but at the same time they undercut prices on all of the networks that have de-peered them, so it could be that there are ulterior motives.

  6. Re:Seen before with Cogent/Sprint by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The analogy doesn't work though, because no matter how much traffic there is or how unbalanced it may be, every last bit of it represents a peer on one network that has paid for connectivity with the other network. Every meg Cogent shoveled through the peering point only went there because a customer of the other network wanted his porn from a server on Cogent's network.

    I won't say that Cogent is in any way, shape or form perfect. They could stand to improve a LOT in many areas. But then, the same is true of every transit provider.