<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/</link>
	<description>News and analysis about data centers, cloud computing, managed hosting and disaster recovery</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:58:44 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: blog6 &#8211; a Voxel IPv6 Update &#124; Voxel Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7672</link>
		<dc:creator>blog6 &#8211; a Voxel IPv6 Update &#124; Voxel Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:10:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7672</guid>
		<description>[...] The landscape for IPv6 peering is interesting. Many network operators are maintaining a similarly stringent set of interconnection requirements for IPv4 and IPv6. Some more progressive access providers have relaxed their peering requirements for v6, opening the door to interoperability testing with a wide variety of participants, though I&#8217;d imagine this door will close again following v6-activation on their access networks. Additionally, age-old peering disputes and tensions have succeeded in migrating from v4 to v6 [3][4]! [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The landscape for IPv6 peering is interesting. Many network operators are maintaining a similarly stringent set of interconnection requirements for IPv4 and IPv6. Some more progressive access providers have relaxed their peering requirements for v6, opening the door to interoperability testing with a wide variety of participants, though I&#8217;d imagine this door will close again following v6-activation on their access networks. Additionally, age-old peering disputes and tensions have succeeded in migrating from v4 to v6 [3][4]! [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Links 27/10/2009: Video Playback Hackfest, Mandriva Linux 2010 Comes Soon &#124; Boycott Novell</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7652</link>
		<dc:creator>Links 27/10/2009: Video Playback Hackfest, Mandriva Linux 2010 Comes Soon &#124; Boycott Novell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7652</guid>
		<description>[...] Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6 IPv6 is the next generation of the Internet Protocol, and will dramatically expand the number of addresses available for web sites, as well as millions of mobile devices with Internet access. Although the transition will address some of the network’s challenges, others will clearly persist. That includes disputes over peering, which have quickly made the jump from IPv4 to IPv6. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6 IPv6 is the next generation of the Internet Protocol, and will dramatically expand the number of addresses available for web sites, as well as millions of mobile devices with Internet access. Although the transition will address some of the network’s challenges, others will clearly persist. That includes disputes over peering, which have quickly made the jump from IPv4 to IPv6. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ardoros (7k9039) 's status on Monday, 26-Oct-09 16:10:03 UTC - Identi.ca</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7613</link>
		<dc:creator>Ardoros (7k9039) 's status on Monday, 26-Oct-09 16:10:03 UTC - Identi.ca</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7613</guid>
		<description>[...] Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6 http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/ [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6 <a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/" rel="nofollow">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: voretaq7</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7551</link>
		<dc:creator>voretaq7</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7551</guid>
		<description>Because of the missing (and apparently eaten) &#039;E&#039; I envision an internet where all peering and transit agreements are negotiated in LOLspeak... it would certainly make things more entertaining :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because of the missing (and apparently eaten) &#8216;E&#8217; I envision an internet where all peering and transit agreements are negotiated in LOLspeak&#8230; it would certainly make things more entertaining <img src='http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: niczar</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7482</link>
		<dc:creator>niczar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:23:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7482</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a systems person, so I don&#039;t deal much with network things like peering, but I&#039;ve noticed something over the years:

When there&#039;s a peering dispute, most of the time Cogent is involved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a systems person, so I don&#8217;t deal much with network things like peering, but I&#8217;ve noticed something over the years:</p>
<p>When there&#8217;s a peering dispute, most of the time Cogent is involved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7472</link>
		<dc:creator>Peering Disputes Migrate to IPv6</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:24:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7472</guid>
		<description>[...] October 23rd, 2009 &#183; No Comments  To address an IPv6 peering dispute, Hurricane Electric baked a cake with a message for Cogent Communications. The cake was devoured by hungry network professionals at the NANOG 47 meeting.Complete info at Data Center Knowledge. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] October 23rd, 2009 &middot; No Comments  To address an IPv6 peering dispute, Hurricane Electric baked a cake with a message for Cogent Communications. The cake was devoured by hungry network professionals at the NANOG 47 meeting.Complete info at Data Center Knowledge. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy Epstein</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/10/22/peering-disputes-migrate-to-ipv6/comment-page-1/#comment-7460</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy Epstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:14:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=17180#comment-7460</guid>
		<description>I ate the e!  That cake was yummy.  Thanks Mike.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I ate the e!  That cake was yummy.  Thanks Mike.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
