RE: Cogent & Google IPv6

[Damien Burke <damien () supremebytes com>]

I have already shut down peering with cogent over ipv6 entirely (two weeks ago) over this issue. 

Cogent needs to get it together and work it out. Google is our overlord - you cannot refuse them.


-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Patrick W. Gilmore
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 12:12 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Cogent & Google IPv6

Are HE & Google the new L3 & FT?

Nah, L3 would never have baked Cogent a cake. :)

Shall we start a pool? Only problem is, should the pool be “who will disconnect from Cogent next?” or “when will Cogent 
blink?” I’m voting for the former.

--
TTFN,
patrick

> On Feb 24, 2016, at 3:08 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl () gmail com> wrote:
>
> This is Google saying that Google does not want to pay for traffic to 
> Cogent. If Cogent wants to exchange any traffic with Google, Cogent is 
> invited to peer directly with Google. Of course Cogent refuses. And 
> now Cogent is not only missing the part of IPv6 internet that is 
> Hurricane Electric single homed but also everything Google.
>
> Why does Cogent refuse? They used to deliver this traffic on free 
> peering with another tier 1 provider. Now they are asked to deliver 
> the same traffic for the same price (free) on a direct peering 
> session. They won't because Cogent believes Google should pay for this 
> traffic. That another Cogent customer already paid for the traffic 
> does not matter. They want double dipping or nothing. So nothing it is.
>
> Seems to me that if you are serious about IPv6 you can not use Cogent 
> as your primary or secondary transit provider. You can use them as 
> your third if you want to.
>
> Regards,
>
> Baldur
>
>
>
> On 24 February 2016 at 20:46, Matt Hoppes <mhoppes () indigowireless com>
> wrote:
>
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Cogent isn't peering with Google 
> > IPv6, shouldn't the traffic flow out to one of their peer points 
> > where another peer DOES peer with Google IPv6 and get you in?
> >
> > Isn't that how the Internet is suppose to work?
> >
> >
> > On 2/24/16 2:43 PM, Damien Burke wrote:
> >
> > > Not sure. I got the same thing today as well.
> > >
> > > Is this some kind of ipv6 war?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Ian Clark
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 10:25 AM
> > > To: NANOG
> > > Subject: Cogent & Google IPv6
> > >
> > > Anyone know what's actually going on here?  We received the 
> > > following information from the two of them, and this just started a week or so ago.
> > >
> > >
> > > *From Cogent, the transit provider for a branch office of ours:*
> > >
> > > Dear Cogent Customer,
> > >
> > > Thank you for contacting Cogent Customer Support for information 
> > > about the Google IPv6 addresses you are unable to reach.
> > >
> > > Google uses transit providers to announce their IPv4 routes to Cogent.
> > >
> > > At this time however, Google has chosen not to announce their IPv6 
> > > routes to Cogent through transit providers.
> > >
> > > We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you and will 
> > > notify you if there is an update to the situation.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *From Google (re: Cogent):*
> > >
> > > Unfortunately it seems that your transit provider does not have IPv6 
> > > connectivity with Google. We suggest you ask your transit provider 
> > > to look for alternatives to interconnect with us.
> > >
> > > Google maintains an open interconnect policy for IPv6 and welcomes 
> > > any network to peer with us for access via IPv6 (and IPv4). For 
> > > those networks that aren't able, or chose not to peer with Google 
> > > via IPv6, they are able to reach us through any of a large number of transit providers.
> > >
> > > For more information in how to peer directly with Google please 
> > > visit https://peering.google.com
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ian Clark
> > > Lead Network Engineer
> > > DreamHost