Routing to ARIN from Teleglobe (2001:5a0::/32)

Bernhard Schmidt berni at
Sun Feb 11 18:30:31 CET 2007

On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:16:58PM -0500, Randy Epstein wrote:

> > Yes they can (shortened, from the second posting by nenad in this
> > thread):
> > |  7 (2001:7f8:1::a500:1273:1)  45.544 ms
> > |  8 (2001:5000:0:11::2)  45.460 ms
> > |  9 (2001:5000:0:20::2)  52.230 ms
> > |  10  * * *
> > Hop 10 would be OCCAID in London.
> So wait.  Teleglobe has OCCAID's route?  This is trace from Teleglobe to

Yup, read 

<5888736d0702101022x3d89be6fh9a6cd1923a7633c4 at>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 13:22:41 -0500
From: "nenad pudar" <nenad.pudar at>
To: "Jeroen Massar" <jeroen at>
Cc: ipv6-ops at
Subject: Re: Routing to ARIN from Teleglobe (2001:5a0::/32)

right in this thread.

> > Valid conclusion. Thing is, both 1273 (Cable and Wireless) and 3257
> > (Tiscali) send a fulltable to OCCAID, and both have a direct peering
> > with Teleglobe (and of course both have it in the table). So why are
> > those prefixes not accepted?
> OCCAID does not receive full transit from any network anymore.  They are
> default free.  If there are missing prefixes, then OCCAID and the other
> network need to work it out.

Can this be confirmed from someone within OCCAID? If yes, why are they
being sent by C&W and Tiscali to their peers? And why does OCCAID take
paths like "30071 3257 8767" (8767 <-> 3257 is a peering, just like 6453
<-> 3257) then? The story of not getting a full transit anymore does not
match up with any sources I have.

I don't think any network is able to be transit-free in todays IPv6, as
there is no tiered structure among the ISPs today. If there was, an R&D
network with presence in US (and a little bit in Europe) would certainly
not be in the position to be transit-free.

> > I bet both of my hands that the number used to be around 150 yesterday.
> > Wait, not only yesterday, this has been an issue since (grepping IRC
> > logs) at least mid-August 2006. OCCAID have been missing quite some
> > routes since then, now they are apparently starting to fix it.
> I don't believe it was 150 yesterday unless some additional network
> peered/connected with OCCAID.  There was an additional peer added a week or
> so ago, France Telecom.  Maybe this resolved some of the missing prefixes?

It resolved France Telecom being unreachable (although they, as well,
had peering established with C&W and Tiscali).

> > I'm not here to blame OCCAID (this time), but finger-pointing to
> > Teleglobe in this case is utter bullsh*t. The missing of half a
> > fulltable at OCCAID has been widely known for months now.
> Half?  Now it's half?  Bernhard, please stick to your story.

Exaggeration, I apologize for that. Let's say ~25%, and don't start
telling me those were badly connected ASNs (France Telecom, Teleglobe).


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list