I can't seem to get packets to cogentco.com via IPv6. It appears to be reachable according to http://www.berkom.blazing.de/tools/ping.cgi and http://www.ipv6-test.com/validate.php, and I can get to other IPv6 hosts via my tunnel, so this appears to be a localized routing problem.
$ traceroute6 cogentco.com
traceroute6 to cogentco.com (2001:550:1::cc01) from 2001:470:1f07:189:21c:b3ff:febc:c615, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets
1 2001:470:1f07:189:9284:dff:fed3:15d4 2.044 ms 3.095 ms 0.677 ms
2 annodomini-1.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net 78.759 ms 78.918 ms 78.096 ms
3 gige-g3-8.core1.nyc4.he.net 78.151 ms 77.643 ms 78.305 ms
4 * * *
5 * * *
6 * * *
7 * * *
8 * * *
^C
$ ping6 cogentco.com
PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2001:470:1f07:189:21c:b3ff:febc:c615 --> 2001:550:1::cc01
Request timeout for icmp_seq=0
Request timeout for icmp_seq=1
Request timeout for icmp_seq=2
Request timeout for icmp_seq=3
Request timeout for icmp_seq=4
Request timeout for icmp_seq=5
Request timeout for icmp_seq=6
^C
--- cogentco.com ping6 statistics ---
8 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss
because Cogent and HE are kicking sand at each other and not peering, or at least, Cogent is, HE says they have offerred to fix this. I don't know the whole story.
I am fortunate enough (i guess?) to have transit with AS174, so I peer IPv6 with them. But they have almost 1000 less v6 prefixes in their "full view" than I get from HE.
ping gives me a timeout. However the website does com up.
Quote from: donbushway on February 02, 2011, 05:53:41 AM
ping gives me a timeout. However the website does com up.
are you sure you are not defaulting back to IPv4???
yes it is ipv6.
Firefox reports address 2001:550:1::cc01
cogento.com brings up => http://cogentco.com/us/
Quote from: donbushway on February 02, 2011, 08:04:34 AM
yes it is ipv6.
Firefox reports address 2001:550:1::cc01
cogento.com brings up => http://cogentco.com/us/
hello,
Not sure what magic is happening but the HE looking glass doesn't have a route for that IP or prefix.
They are announcing it as a /32 according to my router;
v6#show ipv6 route 2001:550:1::cc01
Routing entry for 2001:550::/32
Known via "bgp xxxxx", distance 20, metric 122021, type external
Route count is 1/1, share count 0
Routing paths:
Interesting you can get to it. If you manually telnet to 2001:550:1::cc01 port 80, the socket opens?
Yes the connection opens takes a while like with the browser but it does open. Trace route does show stars after HE.
Short story: Cogent is not IPv6 competent. Find another transit provider if you can.
Quote from: snarked on February 03, 2011, 12:22:30 AM
Short story: Cogent is not IPv6 competent. Find another transit provider if you can.
I wouldn't go that far.....but Cogent does historically have a somewhat agressive, if not to say menacing, habit of de-peering or not peering with other backbones. But they do have competence. HE has the opposite mentality, I suspect to attract significant IPv6 traffic to their network to better position themselves as a heavyweight.
I would go that far and
HAVE gone that far.
In a recent IPv6 traceroute earlier this week by someone I know who peers with cogent, the IPv
6 addresses returned by cogent networking routers included addresses in the ::/80 range (IPv
4 compatible IPv6 addresses). That should not happen.
Quote...
6 te0-0-0-5.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.27.61) 63.292 ms 63.354 ms 63.423 ms
7 te0-0-0-0.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.31.150) 63.590 ms 63.619 ms 63.773 ms
8 te0-2-0-0.ccr21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.25.177) 63.274 ms te0-4-0-0.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.30.178) 63.473 ms te0-3-0-1.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.7.165) 63.208 ms
9 te0-1-0-0.ccr22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.30.153) 63.417 ms te0-1-0-3.mpd22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.24.105) 63.363 ms te0-3-0-3.mpd22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.7.222) 63.352 ms
10 (2001:550:2:3::15) 62.775 ms te0-1-0-cr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.41.77) 63.291 ms 63.486 ms
...
If they were competent, then explain this crap. Compatible addresses are not native addresses.
Quote from: snarked on February 03, 2011, 11:59:20 AM
I would go that far and HAVE gone that far.
In a recent IPv6 traceroute earlier this week by someone I know who peers with cogent, the IPv6 addresses returned by cogent networking routers included addresses in the ::/80 range (IPv4 compatible IPv6 addresses). That should not happen.
Quote...
6 te0-0-0-5.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.27.61) 63.292 ms 63.354 ms 63.423 ms
7 te0-0-0-0.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.31.150) 63.590 ms 63.619 ms 63.773 ms
8 te0-2-0-0.ccr21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.25.177) 63.274 ms te0-4-0-0.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.30.178) 63.473 ms te0-3-0-1.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.7.165) 63.208 ms
9 te0-1-0-0.ccr22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.30.153) 63.417 ms te0-1-0-3.mpd22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.24.105) 63.363 ms te0-3-0-3.mpd22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.7.222) 63.352 ms
10 (2001:550:2:3::15) 62.775 ms te0-1-0-cr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (::ffff:154.54.41.77) 63.291 ms 63.486 ms
...
If they were competent, then explain this crap. Compatible addresses are not native addresses.
I see your point;
Tracing route to ipv6.cogentco.com [2001:550:1::cc01]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 2605:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2605:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::1
3 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2001:550:x:xx::x
4 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms ::ffff:154.54.0.37
5 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms ::ffff:154.54.7.57
6 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms ::ffff:154.54.5.253
7 18 ms 18 ms * 2001:550:1::1
8 17 ms 17 ms 35 ms 2001:550:1::cc01
Trace complete.
the xxx obfuscation is mine.
I have them for now since in Canada IPv6 connectivity doesn't grow on trees. HE gave me a free peering opportunity FFS, which I took and appreciate their generosity in offerring it. The day we roll out with customers however I should have Peer1 and hopefully Tiscali up as well.
Other than fugly traceroutes, and the fact they refuse to peer with HE, anything else? ;D Incidentally the topic of this thread was reachability to cogentco.com.
just as a followup to this, I have read that IPv4 mapped addresses in traceroutes are caused by MPLS routers in the path that do not have IPv6 native stacks.
AT&T would share the Cogent "incompetence", likely for the same reasons;
traceroute6 www.ietf.org
traceroute to www.ietf.org (2001:1890:123a::1:1e), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets
1 cconnv6.cconn.info (2605:2a00:ffff:fffd::1) 3.812 ms 6.499 ms 7.446 ms
2 v6.hautevitesse.net (2605:2a00:ffff:ffff::1) 4.545 ms 4.667 ms 4.783 ms
3 2001:550:2:16::9 (2001:550:2:16::9) 4.072 ms 4.165 ms 4.285 ms
4 2001:1890:1fff:105:192:205:36:77 (2001:1890:1fff:105:192:205:36:77) 11.845 ms 2001:550:3::2ce (2001:550:3::2ce) 57.363 ms 2001:1890:1fff:105:192:205:36:77 (2001:1890:1fff:105:192:205:36:77) 12.125 ms
5 n54ny21crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:ff:ffff:12:122:80:226) 86.448 ms 86.486 ms 84.474 ms
6 cgcil22crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:ff:ffff:12:122:1:2) 84.736 ms 84.832 ms 84.868 ms
7 cr1.cgcil.ip.att.net (::ffff:12.122.2.53) 86.010 ms 86.177 ms 86.343 ms
8 sffca21crs.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:ff:ffff:12:122:4:121) 83.847 ms 84.078 ms 83.707 ms
9 cr81.sj2ca.ip.att.net (::ffff:12.122.1.118) 108.979 ms 108.959 ms 107.975 ms
10 sj2ca401me3.ipv6.att.net (2001:1890:ff:ffff:12:122:126:238) 81.250 ms 81.250 ms 81.379 ms
11 2001:1890:c00:3a00::11fb:8591 (2001:1890:c00:3a00::11fb:8591) 82.225 ms 81.968 ms 82.298 ms
Quote from: cconn on May 07, 2012, 11:04:00 AMjust as a followup to this, I have read that IPv4 mapped addresses in traceroutes are caused by MPLS routers in the path that do not have IPv6 native stacks.
That makes sense. I am trying to make intermediate IPv4 hops visible in my 6in4 tunnelling software, and they could show up as ::ffff:198.51.100.30 in an IPv6 traceroute. I couldn't figure out if ::/96 or ::ffff:0:0/96 is the best choice for such addresses. But if MPLS routers always use ::ffff:0:0/96 for that purpose, I should probably stick with that as well.
Are there any other providers that offer an IPv6 BGP connection over a tunnel for free in addition to HE.net?
This thread is about cogent connectivity. please start a new thread, or google.
I noticed that cogent turns on the peering with he.net every so often specifically for 2001:550::/32. I do not know why they do this. There are enough peers from cogent that peer with he.net, that I would expect the BGP path to be relayed across, such as level3, tata, and abovenet. Interestingly enough, I do see the route in their BGP tables. Does anyone know if he.net is blocking AS174?
Not aware that they were peering, that'd be awesome if they actually did. Logging into the HE route-server, I'm not seeing that network in their routing table:
route-server> sh ipv6 bgp 2001:550::/32
% Network not in table
How are you determining that this peering comes and goes? http://bgp.he.net/AS6939#_peers6 sorted by ASN doesn't show as174 either. The reason mutual cogent/HE peers aren't providing either network with a view of each other, is because they are PEERS, and not transits.