Routing latency issue with HE and "layer42"

[snarked]

From one of my Usenet peers (glorb.com) which just went IPv6 native:

[geoff@name3 ~]$ traceroute6 news.snarked.org
traceroute to news.snarked.org (2607:f350:1::1:4), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1   (2001:1868:213:5::1)  0.361 ms  0.421 ms  0.477 ms
2  po1-vl2.core1.scl.layer42.net (2001:1868:4::1)  0.365 ms  0.454 ms 0.538 ms
3  t1-1.930.core3.eqx.layer42.net (2001:1868::248)  0.739 ms  0.813 ms 0.872 ms
4  t6-4.core2.sea.layer42.net (2001:1868::261)  19.573 ms  19.627 ms 19.665 ms
5  v6-six.he.net (2001:478:180::40)  20.594 ms  19.507 ms  19.948 ms
6  10gigabitethernet4-2.core1.sjc2.he.net (2001:470:0:39::1)  19.816 ms 19.799 ms  19.771 ms
7  10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.pao1.he.net (2001:470:0:32::2)  19.644 ms 19.690 ms  19.720 ms
8  10gigabitethernet1-1.core1.lax1.he.net (2001:470:0:34::2)  30.880 ms 30.919 ms  30.959 ms
9  2001:470:1:1b::2 (2001:470:1:1b::2)  28.089 ms  28.224 ms  28.472 ms
10  news.snarked.org (2607:f350:1::1:4)  28.454 ms  28.442 ms  28.428 ms

Appears to have high latency vs. ipv4:

[geoff@name3 ~]$ traceroute news.snarked.org
traceroute to news.snarked.org (67.43.172.252), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1  69.36.227.89 (69.36.227.89)  0.303 ms  0.353 ms  0.399 ms
2  vl2.core1.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.129)  0.327 ms  0.392 ms  0.449 ms
3  te1-1-930.core3.eqx.layer42.net (69.36.239.158)  0.951 ms  1.011 ms 1.128 ms
4  equinix-sjc.he.net (206.223.116.37)  1.740 ms  1.387 ms  0.981 ms
5  10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.pao1.he.net (72.52.92.69)  1.828 ms  2.007 ms  2.057 ms
6  10gigabitethernet1-1.core1.lax1.he.net (72.52.92.22)  9.125 ms  9.156 ms  9.224 ms
7  t0-1.cs1.lax1.xfernet.net (65.19.143.10)  9.750 ms  9.821 ms  10.118 ms
8  g50.ar9.lax1.xfernet.net (67.43.160.90)  9.925 ms  9.733 ms  9.995 ms
9  news.snarked.org (67.43.172.252)  9.421 ms  9.403 ms  9.312 ms

Apparently, HE's peering point with Layer42 is in San Jose for IPv4 but in Seattle for IPv6.  This causes an RTT disparity of 3:1.  Obviously, this may be a BGP peering issue - but would it be possible to peer with them for BOTH protocols at least at San Jose if not both locations?  Both of you are present at both locations (and they are HQ'ed in Santa Clara; quite nearby).  I believe that your network can support multiple peering points with the same AS; I don't know about theirs (AS 8121).  It appears that going out to them has IPv6 via San Jose, so maybe it's their problem?

From www.snarked.org [67.43.172.253] to 2001:1868:213:5::1
1  snarked.ipv6-gw.xfernet.net (2607:f350:1::1)  0.745 ms  0.465 ms  0.425 ms
2  10gigabitethernet2-2.core1.lax1.he.net (2001:470:1:1b::1)  3.462 ms  0.658 ms  0.415 ms
3  2001:504:a::a500:8121:1 (2001:504:a::a500:8121:1)  0.717 ms  0.771 ms  0.658 ms
4  t1-3.core2.eqx.layer42.net (2001:1868::262)  9.257 ms  21.774 ms  47.025 ms
5  g2-1.core3.eqx.layer42.net (2001:1868::223)  27.858 ms  27.657 ms  27.741 ms
6  t1-1.930.core2.scl.layer42.net (2001:1868::249)  28.28 ms  28.071 ms  28.076 ms
7  2001:1868:4::12 (2001:1868:4::12)  28.146 ms  28.103 ms  28.163 ms

However, similar latency via IPv6.  My IPv4 route to glorb doesn't go through HE (but Mzima and twtelecom instead).

Might this be possible?  Thanks.