Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Maxis IPv6 routing wierdness?

views
     
OlgaC4
post Dec 1 2023, 12:20 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
5,296 posts

Joined: Nov 2006
QUOTE(kwss @ Nov 27 2023, 05:58 PM)
Only Maxis can fix this problem. It is because they didn't peer with Equinix SG on IPv6.
Here is how to verify BGP routing...

Refer to Maxis IPv4 peer:
https://bgp.he.net/AS9534#_peers

You can see from your IPv4 traceroute it go from Maxis directly to Equinix SG.

From https://bgp.he.net/AS9534#_peers6 you can see Equinix SG is not peered for IPv6.
Alternatively, you can see the IPv6 don't have "X" under Peer v4.

You then need to check Graph v6: https://bgp.he.net/AS9534#_graph6
Line in BOLD means they are upstream provider.

Maxis has 3 upstream provider: Telecom Italia, NTT, TATA.

So Maxis just dump the packet to one of their upstream, which is NTT.
NTT route the packet to AS3267, which is GTT Communications.
It is not TiNet.

GTT has a public Looking Glass:
https://www.as3257.net/lg/

2001:19f0:fc00::a4f:252 is located in London, so you can choose any LON router, and enter your destination address:
2001:19f0:4400:4001:5400:ff:fe32:b7e5

You can watch your packet traverse their MPLS network.

You can also do the reverse and start from https://bgp.he.net/AS20473#_peers6
You might be wondering if both the source and destination share a common peer, which is NTT, why do the packet need to traverse GTT?

Fortunately, NTT also has a Looking Glass:
https://www.gin.ntt.net/looking-glass-landing/

If you select BGP and see the prefix announcement, the two network didn't actually connect directly
*
Based on this Maxis route are better then tmnet?

OlgaC4
post Dec 2 2023, 08:07 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
5,296 posts

Joined: Nov 2006
QUOTE(kwss @ Dec 2 2023, 08:05 AM)
Looking at this one specific traceroute, TM is better

CODE

$ traceroute 2001:19f0:4400:4001:5400:ff:fe32:b7e5
traceroute to 2001:19f0:4400:4001:5400:ff:fe32:b7e5 (2001:19f0:4400:4001:5400:ff:fe32:b7e5), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets
1  2001:e68:5427:ABCD::1 (2001:e68:5427:ABCD::1)  0.337 ms  0.364 ms  0.404 ms
2  2001:e68:402c:8001::6c (2001:e68:402c:8001::6c)  5.217 ms  5.195 ms  5.361 ms
3  2001:e68::b:a009 (2001:e68::b:a009)  8.413 ms  9.498 ms  9.872 ms
4  20473.sgw.equinix.com (2001:de8:4::2:473:1)  12.026 ms  13.337 ms  11.031 ms
5  ethernetet-3-0-14-sr2.sgp1.constant.com (2001:19f0:fc00::a4f:252)  11.955 ms ethernetet-0-0-35-sr1.sgp1.constant.com (2001:19f0:fc00::a4f:1a1)  12.751 ms  10.493 ms
6  ethernetet-0-0-53-ds1-j2-r1155-b.sgp1.constant.com (2001:19f0:fc00::a4f:92)  22.839 ms  12.681 ms  16.139 ms
7  * * *
8  2001:19f0:4400:4001:5400:ff:fe32:b7e5 (2001:19f0:4400:4001:5400:ff:fe32:b7e5)  12.362 ms  12.326 ms *

*
So every traceroute the results will be different?

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0162sec    0.71    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 24th December 2025 - 04:38 PM