Comments on: Verizon Refuses to Provide Complete IPv6

By: Jeff

Jeff — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:34:54 +0000

Just got confirmation from Verizon tech support that their policy is to not accept advertisements of prefixes longer than /32 *at all*, even for traffic between two transit customers of Verizon itself.

Now I guess I have to decide whether to turn by BGP peering for IPv6 back down or not. :/

By: Bilal

Bilal — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:04:16 +0000

This is so absurd,
Customers do not deserve unqualified service.
Regards.

By: RTMST3K

RTMST3K — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:32:26 +0000

They basically don’t want to provision the ARIN-allocated hole into their network. I agree that if thousands of customers allocated their blocks from ARIN but wanted access to the global IPv6 internet through Verizon’s 701, then that might create a scaling problem for Verizon’s “existing” v6 routing deployment.

That would leave you with 3 options:

1. Go with another carrier that WILL route your ARIN-allocated block
2. Return your block and get a Verizon block (sounds like what Verizon wants you to do)
3. Somehow arrange for a “tier-1″ connection to the core IPv6 routers (like Verizon did) and handle
BGP routes yourself.

Randy

By: Owen DeLong

Owen DeLong — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:58:52 +0000

Hurricane will provide full transit and does carry those prefixes.

By: Roller Network

Roller Network — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:24:52 +0000

Unfortunately we’re not seeing it on our Verizon border router with the routes we are receiving from them. We’re announcing 2620:0:950::/48 as of last Friday. They must be filtering it internally as well and not just external peers. We’ll send you BGP details via email.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:14:06 +0000

Interestingly, since you posted this, one of those entries should now be reachable for you from VBS. We just turned up 2620:0:280::/48 with VBS late last week as well.

I have a ticket open with them about our /48 not being available at *any* of the public IPv6 looking glasses.

So, they are hearing about this problem (and it is very clearly a problem) from multiple customers.

By: Michael Costello

Michael Costello — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:01:58 +0000

Awesome! I was allocated something out of this /23. Can’t wait for the reachability problems.

By: Martin

Martin — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:58:55 +0000

If you have signed contracts with IPv6 specs, even fine print, that is in your favor in this case, you should really look into changing provider.

Evidently they aren’t doing IPv6 right and if that is something you and your customers require you should shop it from better providers with better clue.

The most clear method to communicate your dissatisfaction with them is simply to not be their customer. This is the best ways to improve the IPv6 global routing state, by rewarding clue, punishing and most importantly not accepting stoopidness.

My remarks are obvious but stating it clearly shouldn’t hurt…

By: Roller Network

Roller Network — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:30:30 +0000

Enough of our customers use IPv6 that it’s a problem. We’ve been dual stack for years.

By: john

john — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:27:10 +0000

Why do you care if it is IP v6 in the first place? Just seems odd. Does ipv6 deliver something that v4 doesn’t in you situation?