Re: pingability of 2600::

[Randy Bush via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

> > Some other people reported issues years ago:
> > https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/1bzfqzn/2600_is_no_longer_pingable/
> Cogent.
> 'nuff said.

some times actual engineering tells more than politicl theory

$ traceroute6 2600::
traceroute6 to 2600:: (2600::) from 2001:418:1::62, 64 hops max, 28 byte packets
 1  r2.sea.rg.net  76.805 ms  0.387 ms  0.319 ms
 2  r1.sea.rg.net  0.335 ms  0.297 ms  0.253 ms
 3  2001:550:2:13::16d:2e  1.406 ms  1.337 ms  1.271 ms
 4  be2579.ccr22.sea02.atlas.cogentco.com  1.153 ms  1.046 ms  1.007 ms
 5  be5823.ccr31.slc01.atlas.cogentco.com  21.332 ms
 6  be6640.ccr82.slc03.atlas.cogentco.com  21.874 ms  23.092 ms *
 7  be9563.ccr82.den01.atlas.cogentco.com  31.272 ms  31.689 ms
    be2353.ccr81.den01.atlas.cogentco.com  32.385 ms
 8  * * *
 9  * * *
10  port-channel2717.ccr91.cle04.atlas.cogentco.com  55.437 ms  55.553 ms  55.502 ms
11  port-channel9258.ccr91.dca04.atlas.cogentco.com  67.533 ms
    port-channel9259.ccr92.dca04.atlas.cogentco.com  67.553 ms  67.528 ms
12  * * *
13  be2713.agr61.iad02.atlas.cogentco.com  69.661 ms *
14  te0-0-0-12.nr61.b014476-2.iad02.atlas.cogentco.com  69.179 ms  69.284 ms  69.097 ms
15  2600.cogentco.com  70.695 ms !P  70.168 ms !P  71.392 ms !P

similarly via ntt then on to cogent

randy
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/GJGOMTFF6WFHN7KJ5BNYNDIVA23WRJTK/