Mailing List Archive: nsp: ipv6

Open Letters to Sixxs

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 7:02 AM

Post #1 of 23 (2446 views)
Permalink

Open Letters to Sixxs

Hello People

i have one question:

why SIXXS is very strict like that ?

forcing a special address format is a idiotic work

everyone have a format of address

everyone have his way of saying address

every country have there language.

there's bilion of address definition at this time.

signed up for Sixxs for 2 times and resulted in a refuse because of bad address

Sixxs, please would you revise your requiremant ?

Emailed you for one month and still have no reply ?

did you has a coppy of my passport ?

did you saw my identity card ?

have you called me ?

anyway, i have realy not seen any Strict service like you, SIXXS.

i can evean pay for your service, if you wish.

just fix your policy and by nice with people like everyone is.

Thank you.

Meftah Tayeb
IT Consulting
http://www.tmvoip.com/
phone: +21321656139
Mobile: +213660347746

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 7:07 AM

Post #2 of 23 (2402 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

anyway, waiting for everyone to react.
i don't care.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tristan Santore" <tristan.santore [at] internexusconnect>
To: <ipv6-ops [at] lists>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

> On 15/09/11 15:02, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>> Hello People
>>
>> i have one question:
>>
>> why SIXXS is very strict like that ?
>>
>> forcing a special address format is a idiotic work
>>
>> everyone have a format of address
>>
>> everyone have his way of saying address
>>
>> every country have there language.
>>
>> there's bilion of address definition at this time.
>>
>> signed up for Sixxs for 2 times and resulted in a refuse because of bad
>> address
>>
>> Sixxs, please would you revise your requiremant ?
>>
>> Emailed you for one month and still have no reply ?
>>
>> did you has a coppy of my passport ?
>>
>> did you saw my identity card ?
>>
>> have you called me ?
>>
>> anyway, i have realy not seen any Strict service like you, SIXXS.
>>
>> i can evean pay for your service, if you wish.
>>
>> just fix your policy and by nice with people like everyone is.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Meftah Tayeb
>> IT Consulting
>> http://www.tmvoip.com/
>> phone: +21321656139
>> Mobile: +213660347746
>>
>>
>> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
>> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>>
>> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
> You are barking at the wrong tree, this list has nothing to do with
> SIXXS, probably why you are not getting anywhere in the first place. Not
> following procedures!
>
> Regards,
> Tristan Santore
>
>
> --
> Tristan Santore BSc MBCS
> TS4523-RIPE
> Network and Infrastructure Operations
> InterNexusConnect
> Mobile +44-78-55069812
> Tristan.Santore [at] internexusconnect
>
> Former Thawte Notary
> (Please note: Thawte has closed its WoT programme down,
> and I am therefore no longer able to accredit trust)
>
> For Fedora related issues, please email me at:
> TSantore [at] fedoraproject
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 7:12 AM

Post #3 of 23 (2400 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

ok, that's a positive answer.
but let me ask you a question:
do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?
that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !

----- Original Message -----
From: Arjan Van Der Oest
To: Meftah Tayeb
Cc: ipv6-ops [at] lists ; nanog [at] nanog
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:02 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
Hello People

i have one question:

why SIXXS is very strict like that ?

Why sent this to this list. Consider using another tunnelbroker if you're not satisfied with Sixxs. I can recommend Hurricane, www.tunnelbroker.com (this is, by no means, a judgement on Sixxs and their services).

--
Met vriendelijke groet,

Arjan van der Oest
Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer

Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

tristan.santore at internexusconnect

Sep 15, 2011, 7:16 AM

Post #4 of 23 (2395 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15/09/11 15:02, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
> Hello People
>
> i have one question:
>
> why SIXXS is very strict like that ?
>
> forcing a special address format is a idiotic work
>
> everyone have a format of address
>
> everyone have his way of saying address
>
> every country have there language.
>
> there's bilion of address definition at this time.
>
> signed up for Sixxs for 2 times and resulted in a refuse because of bad
> address
>
> Sixxs, please would you revise your requiremant ?
>
> Emailed you for one month and still have no reply ?
>
> did you has a coppy of my passport ?
>
> did you saw my identity card ?
>
> have you called me ?
>
> anyway, i have realy not seen any Strict service like you, SIXXS.
>
> i can evean pay for your service, if you wish.
>
> just fix your policy and by nice with people like everyone is.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Meftah Tayeb
> IT Consulting
> http://www.tmvoip.com/
> phone: +21321656139
> Mobile: +213660347746
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
You are barking at the wrong tree, this list has nothing to do with
SIXXS, probably why you are not getting anywhere in the first place. Not
following procedures!

Regards,
Tristan Santore

--
Tristan Santore BSc MBCS
TS4523-RIPE
Network and Infrastructure Operations
InterNexusConnect
Mobile +44-78-55069812
Tristan.Santore [at] internexusconnect

Former Thawte Notary
(Please note: Thawte has closed its WoT programme down,
and I am therefore no longer able to accredit trust)

For Fedora related issues, please email me at:
TSantore [at] fedoraproject

Arjan at voiceworks

Sep 15, 2011, 7:20 AM

Post #5 of 23 (2395 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:02 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
> Hello People
>
> i have one question:
>
> why SIXXS is very strict like that ?
>
>

Why sent this to this list. Consider using another tunnelbroker if you're not satisfied with Sixxs. I can recommend Hurricane, www.tunnelbroker.com (this is, by no means, a judgement on Sixxs and their services).

--
Met vriendelijke groet,

Arjan van der Oest
Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer

Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere

Attachments:

smime.p7s (4.69 KB)

Arjan at voiceworks

Sep 15, 2011, 7:29 AM

Post #6 of 23 (2399 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:12 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
> ok, that's a positive answer.
> but let me ask you a question:
> do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?

Don't know, ask them. You can send them an e-mail, it's listed on the site.

> that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !

I have had no negative experience with them, but your milage may vary. I don't know what the issue is and to be honest I don't want to know. But like someone said: barking at the wrong tree. Just open a HE account, it only takes 5 seconds. No need to pay, no need to send photocopies of anything.

--
Met vriendelijke groet,

Arjan van der Oest
Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer

Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere

Attachments:

smime.p7s (4.69 KB)

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 7:34 AM

Post #7 of 23 (2397 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

i know is not peered at all.
that's i was looking for SIXXS cause SIXXS is mostly peered everywhere.
Thank you

----- Original Message -----
From: Arjan Van Der Oest
To: Meftah Tayeb
Cc: ipv6-ops [at] lists
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:12 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
ok, that's a positive answer.
but let me ask you a question:
do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?

Don't know, ask them. You can send them an e-mail, it's listed on the site.

that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !

I have had no negative experience with them, but your milage may vary. I don't know what the issue is and to be honest I don't want to know. But like someone said: barking at the wrong tree. Just open a HE account, it only takes 5 seconds. No need to pay, no need to send photocopies of anything.

--
Met vriendelijke groet,

Arjan van der Oest
Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer

Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 7:46 AM

Post #8 of 23 (2398 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

lol Matt!
that's only regarding Level3/He.NET/Cogent.
i say He.Net is very very good.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Ryanczak" <ryanczak [at] gmail>
To: <ipv6-ops [at] lists>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

> On 9/15/11 10:34 AM, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>> i know is not peered at all.
>
> I don't believe this is an accurate statement regarding he.net's peering
> and/or generally connectivity to the IPv6 Internet. In my experience
> he.net is well connected to the IPv6 world.
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

ryanczak at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 7:55 AM

Post #9 of 23 (2394 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 9/15/11 10:34 AM, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
> i know is not peered at all.

I don't believe this is an accurate statement regarding he.net's peering
and/or generally connectivity to the IPv6 Internet. In my experience
he.net is well connected to the IPv6 world.

mike at mikejones

Sep 15, 2011, 7:58 AM

Post #10 of 23 (2395 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15 September 2011 15:12, Meftah Tayeb <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail> wrote:
> ok, that's a positive answer.
> but let me ask you a question:
> do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?

4 189 ms 134 ms 99 ms 10gigabitethernet7-4.core1.nyc4.he.net
[2001:470:0:3e::1]
5 131 ms 152 ms 111 ms 2001:470:0:202::2
6 144 ms 147 ms 238 ms 2001:1900:19:7::4
7 132 ms 241 ms 143 ms vl-4060.car2.NewYork2.Level3.net
[2001:1900:4:1::fe]
[.Jitter is my cable connection, not reflective of the performance of
HEs network]

As for cogent - Does anyone really care? this is only a problem for
reaching a single homed network behind cogent, and anyone running such
a network knows that their IPv6 connectivity doesn't work properly
anyway and they are the broken ones.

Whatever you think of the issues surrounding the peering dispute (I am
sure at least comcast agree with cogent that a Tier 1 network should
pay what is essentially a Tier 2 network for peering!), the fact
remains that HE did get there first with their defacto tier 1 status,
and for the time being at least "working IPv6" is realistically
"working IPv6 connection to HE and peers".

The more users/content that is behind HE and peers that is not
reachable from cogent the better, as it puts more pressure on them to
start behaving themselves and peering properly like everyone else.

- Mike

nick at foobar

Sep 15, 2011, 8:00 AM

Post #11 of 23 (2394 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15/09/2011 15:46, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
> lol Matt!
> that's only regarding Level3/He.NET/Cogent.
> i say He.Net is very very good.

HE has ipv6 interconnection to Level3.

Nick

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 8:01 AM

Post #12 of 23 (2399 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Good thinking mike
i do have a VoIp carrier single homed with Cogent.
any solution?
(*NO IPV4!*)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Jones" <mike [at] mikejones>
To: "Meftah Tayeb" <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail>
Cc: "Arjan Van Der Oest" <Arjan [at] voiceworks>; <nanog [at] nanog>;
<ipv6-ops [at] lists>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

> On 15 September 2011 15:12, Meftah Tayeb <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail> wrote:
>> ok, that's a positive answer.
>> but let me ask you a question:
>> do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?
>
> 4 189 ms 134 ms 99 ms 10gigabitethernet7-4.core1.nyc4.he.net
> [2001:470:0:3e::1]
> 5 131 ms 152 ms 111 ms 2001:470:0:202::2
> 6 144 ms 147 ms 238 ms 2001:1900:19:7::4
> 7 132 ms 241 ms 143 ms vl-4060.car2.NewYork2.Level3.net
> [2001:1900:4:1::fe]
> [.Jitter is my cable connection, not reflective of the performance of
> HEs network]
>
> As for cogent - Does anyone really care? this is only a problem for
> reaching a single homed network behind cogent, and anyone running such
> a network knows that their IPv6 connectivity doesn't work properly
> anyway and they are the broken ones.
>
> Whatever you think of the issues surrounding the peering dispute (I am
> sure at least comcast agree with cogent that a Tier 1 network should
> pay what is essentially a Tier 2 network for peering!), the fact
> remains that HE did get there first with their defacto tier 1 status,
> and for the time being at least "working IPv6" is realistically
> "working IPv6 connection to HE and peers".
>
> The more users/content that is behind HE and peers that is not
> reachable from cogent the better, as it puts more pressure on them to
> start behaving themselves and peering properly like everyone else.
>
> - Mike
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 15, 2011, 8:19 AM

Post #13 of 23 (2400 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Pim Van,
i am just looking for a alternative way.
i don't need this stupid SixXs at all anymore.
also, Pim, are you Pim for Multicast? no IGMP? :D
:)
Thank you

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pim van Pelt" <pim [at] ipng>
To: "Meftah Tayeb" <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail>
Cc: <ipv6-ops [at] lists>; <nanog [at] nanog>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

> Hoi,
>
> Meftah perhaps you mailed the wrong people -- you seem to be
> specifically addressing SixXS, but you mailed nanog [at] nanog and
> ipv6-ops [at] lists, both of which may not be able to
> authoritatively answer your questions.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Meftah Tayeb <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail>
> wrote:
>> why SIXXS is very strict like that ?
> I suppose it's up to SixXS to define their policy (one account per
> person comes to mind *) and revise it if they see a need. They are
> free to accept or reject any user and I do not believe they have an
> obligation to serve any given user (ie access is a privilege not a
> right), and I think they have a right to ask for information just as
> much as users have a right to not use their service if they believe
> the amount of information SixXS wants to know about them and their
> intended use is too much. In general I think they are rather
> transparent about rejection reasons, in your case likely because you
> neglected to heed the FAQ item on one account per person.
>
> I'm not sure bringing this up in the scope of nanog or ipv6-ops is
> productive. It's not clear to me, except for your plethora of
> questions, what you are trying to accomplish.
>
> I'm sorry you feel that SixXS is not the right place for you. Luckily
> there's plenty of choice in high quality tunnelbrokers, as others in
> this thread have pointed out.
>
> groet,
> Pim
>
> *) http://www.sixxs.net/faq/account/?faq=oneaccount
> --
> Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
> PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

pim at ipng

Sep 15, 2011, 8:28 AM

Post #14 of 23 (2396 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Hoi,

Meftah perhaps you mailed the wrong people -- you seem to be
specifically addressing SixXS, but you mailed nanog [at] nanog and
ipv6-ops [at] lists, both of which may not be able to
authoritatively answer your questions.

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Meftah Tayeb <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail> wrote:
> why SIXXS is very strict like that ?
I suppose it's up to SixXS to define their policy (one account per
person comes to mind *) and revise it if they see a need. They are
free to accept or reject any user and I do not believe they have an
obligation to serve any given user (ie access is a privilege not a
right), and I think they have a right to ask for information just as
much as users have a right to not use their service if they believe
the amount of information SixXS wants to know about them and their
intended use is too much. In general I think they are rather
transparent about rejection reasons, in your case likely because you
neglected to heed the FAQ item on one account per person.

I'm not sure bringing this up in the scope of nanog or ipv6-ops is
productive. It's not clear to me, except for your plethora of
questions, what you are trying to accomplish.

I'm sorry you feel that SixXS is not the right place for you. Luckily
there's plenty of choice in high quality tunnelbrokers, as others in
this thread have pointed out.

groet,
Pim

*) http://www.sixxs.net/faq/account/?faq=oneaccount
--
Pim van Pelt <pim [at] ipng>
PBVP1-RIPE - http://www.ipng.nl/

gert at space

Sep 15, 2011, 8:59 AM

Post #15 of 23 (2395 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:01:33PM +0200, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
> Good thinking mike
> i do have a VoIp carrier single homed with Cogent.
> any solution?

Go to a real provider.

Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

garry at nethinks

Sep 15, 2011, 9:06 AM

Post #16 of 23 (2398 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15.09.2011 17:59, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:01:33PM +0200, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>> Good thinking mike
>> i do have a VoIp carrier single homed with Cogent.
>> any solution?
> Go to a real provider.
>
LOL ... wow, a Carrier single-homed at Cogent ... double fail? ;) Let me
guess, you picked the cheapest VoIP carrier you could find?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt

Sep 15, 2011, 12:58 PM

Post #17 of 23 (2385 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:01:33 +0200, Meftah Tayeb said:
> Good thinking mike
> i do have a VoIp carrier single homed with Cogent.
> any solution?

Sure. Make sure you have alternate plans for when Cogent gets into another
peering tiff. Not *if*, but *when*. And you probably want to have a long,
detailed, technical discussion with your Voip carrier about what *they* intend
to do when Cogent gets into a peering tiff.

And while you're at it, see if you can find out what *other* surprises their
network design has in it - I'm willing to bet a large pizza with everything but
anchovies that "single homed with Cogent" is *not* the only massive deficiency
in their network - it's probably the equivalent of finding a brown M&M backstage
at a Van Halen concert...

(Yes, there's corner cases where "single homing to a Tier-1" makes business
sense, if the pipe is really cheap and you can survive the revenue hit caused
by a routing/peering spat. I don't think "VOIP carrier" is one of those corner
cases)

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt

Sep 15, 2011, 12:58 PM

Post #18 of 23 (2386 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

sander at steffann

Sep 16, 2011, 1:37 AM

Post #19 of 23 (2368 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Hi,

> i know is not peered at all.
> that's i was looking for SIXXS cause SIXXS is mostly peered everywhere.

Actually, SixXS uses address space from the providers that host the tunnel servers, so the exact peering policy will vary depending on which tunnel server you use. I don't think that SixXS has tunnel servers at badly connected providers though.

Met vriendelijke groet,
Sander Steffann

Attachments:

smime.p7s (2.04 KB)

me at benedikt-stockebrand

Sep 16, 2011, 2:20 AM

Post #20 of 23 (2368 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Hello Pim, Meftah and list,

"Meftah Tayeb" <tayeb.meftah [at] gmail> writes:

> i am just looking for a alternative way.

Since you are talking VoIP, you really shouldn't consider using a
tunnel for connectivity; you really want to avoid the latency impact.

> i don't need this stupid SixXs at all anymore.

Do you actually realize *why* they need some amount of information?
If the legal situation is at least remotely like here in Germany (both
are part of the EU) they would be taking some serious legal risks if
they can't reliably identify their users. In case the police shows up
with a warrant and requests them to do so, they may face serious legal
trouble.

Hurricane Electric either doesn't care about such issues or is running
its service only in countries where abuse by unidentified users isn't
a legal problem to the provider.

Beyond that, SixXS is a free service. It basically boils down to "You
get what you pay for"; it's fine if you want to use IPv6 in a lab
setup, but if you need business grade services, then find a business
grade provider and pay them business grade fees. If you really want
to use a tunnel, check for their POP partners.

Finally, have you actually read the FAQ Pim pointed to? I haven't
taken a look at it for quite some time, but when I checked it a couple
years ago I found it rather well written.

> also, Pim, are you Pim for Multicast? no IGMP? :D

No, he's one of the two people who started SixXS.

Cheers,

Benedikt

--
Business Grade IPv6
Consulting, Training, Projects

Benedikt Stockebrand, Dipl.-Inform. http://www.benedikt-stockebrand.de/

hlk at kramse

Sep 17, 2011, 4:31 AM

Post #21 of 23 (2346 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 15/09/2011, at 16.34, Meftah Tayeb wrote:

> i know is not peered at all.
> that's i was looking for SIXXS cause SIXXS is mostly peered everywhere.
> Thank you

I think some of your comments show little actual experience with this.

From my viewpoint we try to be well-connected to "IPv6 internet" - sorry for not having a good term to describe this.

This means that we want our transit providers to be well-connected, which two providers AS16245 NGDC and AS3549 Global Crossing are with peering to Hurricane Electric
- and we started tickets to Level3 asking WHY the *bleeeep* they are not. He.net is obviously a huge part of the IPv6 networks and a transit provider MUST be able to reach them, in my opinion.

Being well-connected though means connected to the resources you NEED - which is why this quickly becomes complex, as in
we can have the best speed and connectivity, but if some customer cannot reach network XXX then they still will consider our service BAAAAD.

Hint: most customers use facebook, googleservices, akamai etc. so the research you need to do is less. This realized you will probably see that some peer directly with these
even though peering disputes make them not want to peer with he.net for instance.

There will be some period of time when people realizes they are not as well connected on IPv6 as before.

What this boils down to is, does SiXXS provide the connectivity you need?
- you should research their peerings and the network you are trying to reach

and likewise, does He.net tunnelbroker provide the connectivity you need?
- you should research their peerings and the network you are trying to reach

Then from personal experience SiXXS is awesome, really reaallllly awesome, because:
They consider IPv6 PRODUCTION, even asking that you keep your tunnels working - with a point scoring system in place

They have written policies asking that you do not dns spam
http://www.sixxs.net/faq/sixxs/?faq=dnsspam
"Our policy is immediate and irrevocable deletion of the user account and all resources linked to it, if anybody files a justified and documented complaint about the use of these hostnames within networks maintained by MNT-SIXXS (which means all tunnelservers in custody of our tunnelbroker software). DNS Spam and shellhosters/vhosters are not welcome at our service."

Thank you SiXXS!

Their service, or actually the various tunnel servers I have used are great, good speed - even if tunnels - almost no problems using for production

also from personal experience he.net tunnelbroker is great, and quicker to get into - not requiring the same level of participation like sixxs.

Best regards

Henrik, AS12617 operator - we are very likely to peer with anyone that wants to BTW :-)

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Arjan Van Der Oest
> To: Meftah Tayeb
> Cc: ipv6-ops [at] lists
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs
>
> On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:12 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>> ok, that's a positive answer.
>> but let me ask you a question:
>> do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?
>
> Don't know, ask them. You can send them an e-mail, it's listed on the site.
>
>> that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !
>
> I have had no negative experience with them, but your milage may vary. I don't know what the issue is and to be honest I don't want to know. But like someone said: barking at the wrong tree. Just open a HE account, it only takes 5 seconds. No need to pay, no need to send photocopies of anything.
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Arjan van der Oest
> Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer
>
> Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere
>
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com

--
Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix
hlk [at] kramse hlk [at] solidonetworks
+45 2026 6000 cand.scient CISSP CEH
http://solidonetworks.com/ Network Security is a business enabler

tayeb.meftah at gmail

Sep 17, 2011, 5:43 AM

Post #22 of 23 (2342 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

Henrik,
i'm allmost happy with He.net and i'm with them 24X7 on twitter (me i'm
DZLink)
we always talk and message and suggest
i ignored the TroubleMaker Sixxs right now
i'm looking for some friend to get connectivity to everywhere through a Ipv6
6in4 tunnel and avoid looking a that stupid sixxs right now
and i do use he.net for about one yeer with dynamic endpoint without any
problem at all.
when i say is not peered at all, i mean with Cogent/Level3, but aparantly,
is peered with level3 right now
thank you
----- Original Message -----
From: "Henrik Lund Kramshøj" <hlk [at] kramse>
To: <ipv6-ops [at] lists>
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs

On 15/09/2011, at 16.34, Meftah Tayeb wrote:

> i know is not peered at all.
> that's i was looking for SIXXS cause SIXXS is mostly peered everywhere.
> Thank you

I think some of your comments show little actual experience with this.

>From my viewpoint we try to be well-connected to "IPv6 internet" - sorry for
not having a good term to describe this.

This means that we want our transit providers to be well-connected, which
two providers AS16245 NGDC and AS3549 Global Crossing are with peering to
Hurricane Electric
- and we started tickets to Level3 asking WHY the *bleeeep* they are not.
He.net is obviously a huge part of the IPv6 networks and a transit provider
MUST be able to reach them, in my opinion.

Being well-connected though means connected to the resources you NEED -
which is why this quickly becomes complex, as in
we can have the best speed and connectivity, but if some customer cannot
reach network XXX then they still will consider our service BAAAAD.

Hint: most customers use facebook, googleservices, akamai etc. so the
research you need to do is less. This realized you will probably see that
some peer directly with these
even though peering disputes make them not want to peer with he.net for
instance.

There will be some period of time when people realizes they are not as well
connected on IPv6 as before.

What this boils down to is, does SiXXS provide the connectivity you need?
- you should research their peerings and the network you are trying to reach

and likewise, does He.net tunnelbroker provide the connectivity you need?
- you should research their peerings and the network you are trying to reach

Then from personal experience SiXXS is awesome, really reaallllly awesome,
because:
They consider IPv6 PRODUCTION, even asking that you keep your tunnels
working - with a point scoring system in place

They have written policies asking that you do not dns spam
http://www.sixxs.net/faq/sixxs/?faq=dnsspam
"Our policy is immediate and irrevocable deletion of the user account and
all resources linked to it, if anybody files a justified and documented
complaint about the use of these hostnames within networks maintained by
MNT-SIXXS (which means all tunnelservers in custody of our tunnelbroker
software). DNS Spam and shellhosters/vhosters are not welcome at our
service."

Thank you SiXXS!

Their service, or actually the various tunnel servers I have used are great,
good speed - even if tunnels - almost no problems using for production

also from personal experience he.net tunnelbroker is great, and quicker to
get into - not requiring the same level of participation like sixxs.

Best regards

Henrik, AS12617 operator - we are very likely to peer with anyone that wants
to BTW :-)

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Arjan Van Der Oest
> To: Meftah Tayeb
> Cc: ipv6-ops [at] lists
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs
>
> On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:12 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>> ok, that's a positive answer.
>> but let me ask you a question:
>> do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?
>
> Don't know, ask them. You can send them an e-mail, it's listed on the
> site.
>
>> that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !
>
> I have had no negative experience with them, but your milage may vary. I
> don't know what the issue is and to be honest I don't want to know. But
> like someone said: barking at the wrong tree. Just open a HE account, it
> only takes 5 seconds. No need to pay, no need to send photocopies of
> anything.
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Arjan van der Oest
> Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer
>
> Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere
>
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la
> base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com

--
Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix
hlk [at] kramse hlk [at] solidonetworks
+45 2026 6000 cand.scient CISSP CEH
http://solidonetworks.com/ Network Security is a business enabler

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base
des signatures de virus 6470 (20110916) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6470 (20110916) __________

Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

hlk at kramse

Sep 17, 2011, 7:12 AM

Post #23 of 23 (2341 views)
Permalink

Re: Open Letters to Sixxs [In reply to]

On 17/09/2011, at 14.43, Meftah Tayeb wrote:

> Henrik,
> i'm allmost happy with He.net and i'm with them 24X7 on twitter (me i'm DZLink)
> we always talk and message and suggest
> i ignored the TroubleMaker Sixxs right now
> i'm looking for some friend to get connectivity to everywhere through a Ipv6 6in4 tunnel and avoid looking a that stupid sixxs right now
Can you please stop referring to sixxs in derogatory terms, it makes you look bad.

You may not agree to their terms, fine
You may not want to use them, fine

Facts are they provide a service for free and run their networks very nicely, so you can trust your tunnel is running smoothly. They have over the years dedicated quite a lot of resources to document IPv6 stuff and making IPv6 available to a large user base. I wonder how many people have used their detailed instructions when configuring IPv6 in general?

The only trouble I see is that people get greedy with a lot of free and open services, and if you "cannot be bothered" with doing a few things yourself?! WHAT, is your time really that more worth than the time spent by SiXXS people?

BTW I am not part of SiXXS net, admin team or anything, but I can understand perfectly why they decided to have their policies in place!

> and i do use he.net for about one yeer with dynamic endpoint without any problem at all.
> when i say is not peered at all, i mean with Cogent/Level3, but aparantly, is peered with level3 right now
Yeah I checked my routers too and it seems they have agreed on peering after all :-)

Best regards

Henrik

> thank you
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henrik Lund Kramshøj" <hlk [at] kramse>
> To: <ipv6-ops [at] lists>
> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:31 PM
> Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs
>
>
>
> On 15/09/2011, at 16.34, Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>
>> i know is not peered at all.
>> that's i was looking for SIXXS cause SIXXS is mostly peered everywhere.
>> Thank you
>
> I think some of your comments show little actual experience with this.
>
>> From my viewpoint we try to be well-connected to "IPv6 internet" - sorry for
> not having a good term to describe this.
>
> This means that we want our transit providers to be well-connected, which two providers AS16245 NGDC and AS3549 Global Crossing are with peering to Hurricane Electric
> - and we started tickets to Level3 asking WHY the *bleeeep* they are not. He.net is obviously a huge part of the IPv6 networks and a transit provider MUST be able to reach them, in my opinion.
>
> Being well-connected though means connected to the resources you NEED - which is why this quickly becomes complex, as in
> we can have the best speed and connectivity, but if some customer cannot reach network XXX then they still will consider our service BAAAAD.
>
> Hint: most customers use facebook, googleservices, akamai etc. so the research you need to do is less. This realized you will probably see that some peer directly with these
> even though peering disputes make them not want to peer with he.net for instance.
>
> There will be some period of time when people realizes they are not as well connected on IPv6 as before.
>
>
> What this boils down to is, does SiXXS provide the connectivity you need?
> - you should research their peerings and the network you are trying to reach
>
> and likewise, does He.net tunnelbroker provide the connectivity you need?
> - you should research their peerings and the network you are trying to reach
>
>
>
> Then from personal experience SiXXS is awesome, really reaallllly awesome, because:
> They consider IPv6 PRODUCTION, even asking that you keep your tunnels working - with a point scoring system in place
>
> They have written policies asking that you do not dns spam
> http://www.sixxs.net/faq/sixxs/?faq=dnsspam
> "Our policy is immediate and irrevocable deletion of the user account and all resources linked to it, if anybody files a justified and documented complaint about the use of these hostnames within networks maintained by MNT-SIXXS (which means all tunnelservers in custody of our tunnelbroker software). DNS Spam and shellhosters/vhosters are not welcome at our service."
>
> Thank you SiXXS!
>
> Their service, or actually the various tunnel servers I have used are great, good speed - even if tunnels - almost no problems using for production
>
>
>
> also from personal experience he.net tunnelbroker is great, and quicker to get into - not requiring the same level of participation like sixxs.
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Henrik, AS12617 operator - we are very likely to peer with anyone that wants to BTW :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Arjan Van Der Oest
>> To: Meftah Tayeb
>> Cc: ipv6-ops [at] lists
>> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:29 PM
>> Subject: Re: Open Letters to Sixxs
>>
>> On 15Sep, 2011, at 16:12 , Meftah Tayeb wrote:
>>> ok, that's a positive answer.
>>> but let me ask you a question:
>>> do HE.NET peer with cogent? level3?
>>
>> Don't know, ask them. You can send them an e-mail, it's listed on the site.
>>
>>> that the way i'm looking arround SIXXS and they look like a IPV6 POLICE !
>>
>> I have had no negative experience with them, but your milage may vary. I don't know what the issue is and to be honest I don't want to know. But like someone said: barking at the wrong tree. Just open a HE account, it only takes 5 seconds. No need to pay, no need to send photocopies of anything.
>>
>> --
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>> Arjan van der Oest
>> Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer
>>
>> Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6465 (20110915) __________
>>
>> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>
> --
> Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix
> hlk [at] kramse hlk [at] solidonetworks
> +45 2026 6000 cand.scient CISSP CEH
> http://solidonetworks.com/ Network Security is a business enabler
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6470 (20110916) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des signatures de virus 6470 (20110916) __________
>
> Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>

--
Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix
hlk [at] kramse hlk [at] solidonetworks
+45 2026 6000 cand.scient CISSP CEH
http://solidonetworks.com/ Network Security is a business enabler

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads