nanog mailing list archives

Re: pingability of 2600::

From: Randy Bush via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 15:27:54 -0800

hi elmar,

yes, it is the old issue of HE and Cogent not peering over IPv6.  the
only aspect that bothers me is that it indicates a lack of business
pressure for IPv6 routability.  IPv6 has farther to go than we might
like.

randy
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/L5SRNW5S57YRLAGMTS4GSPA7LMGARCWG/

Current thread:

pingability of 2600:: Marco Moock via NANOG (Jan 15)
- Re: pingability of 2600:: Brandon Martin via NANOG (Jan 15)
  - Re: pingability of 2600:: Marco Moock via NANOG (Jan 20)
- Re: pingability of 2600:: Elmar K. Bins via NANOG (Jan 15)
  - Re: pingability of 2600:: Randy Bush via NANOG (Jan 15)
  - Re: pingability of 2600:: Elmar K. Bins via NANOG (Jan 15)
    - Re: pingability of 2600:: Randy Bush via NANOG (Jan 15)
    - RE: pingability of 2600:: Gary Sparkes via NANOG (Jan 15)
    - Re: pingability of 2600:: Randy Bush via NANOG (Jan 15)