Re: pingability of 2600::

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

> While I can't really speak to cogent's motivations for not doing this

my memory is that cogent said publicly that they treat IPv6 the same as
IPv4 business wise, i.e. with respect to transit and peering

> HE is more than happy and willing to, and they DO peer on v4

do they really peer over IPv4?  the above would seem to hint otherwise

randy
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/IQ6IRXUB4YC2JL3UZ7YRZNNC4GK4A52H/