IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 14:05 UTC (Fri) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167)
In reply to: FSF: GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance and give us a way to fight back by RobSeace
Parent article: FSF: GNU hackers discover HACIENDA government surveillance and give us a way to fight back

Are you sure of your facts?

My understanding, as a European, is that Comcast has an extensive IPv6 rollout, which contributes to that high percentage. The sheer size and population of the US makes IPv6 an attractive option for an ISP expecting to pick up a sizeable fraction of the national market.

In contrast in the UK none of the ISPs a typical consumer has heard of offer IPv6. All the big incumbents have decided they'll sit tight.

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 14:36 UTC (Fri) by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435) [Link] (11 responses)

Yes, supposedly Comcast is doing a lot of IPv6 work, and should be praised for it... But, as far as I know, they're still only rolling it out to a few users in select areas... And, last we checked, we couldn't get it here at home for our Comcast Business Class connection... I'm sure they'll keep doing more, and are probably wise to go slowly with it, but I'm just impatient to see the day where EVERY ISP offers a dual-stack connection as standard...

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 14:44 UTC (Fri) by jannic (subscriber, #5821) [Link] (7 responses)

Be careful what you wish for: Here in Germany, some providers (at least Unitymedia) are delivering native IPv6 to their customers. But they are using Dual Stack Lite: No native IPv4, but some kind of NAT instead.

Of course, in the long run, that's the way to go. Full Dual Stack deployments just don't solve the issue of scarce IPv4 addresses. But for now, from a customer's point of view, even native IPv4 + tunneled IPv6 would be better than native IPv6 + NATed IPv4.

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 14:54 UTC (Fri) by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435) [Link] (5 responses)

Well, here in the US, pretty much everyone gets NAT over a single dynamic IPv4, anyway... Unless you pay big money for a business class connection and static IPs (which we do here at home)... So, for most people here, it wouldn't be any issue to have their IPv4 access over a single NAT'd IP... While the static IPv6 subnet they'd get to go along with it, would be an amazing new benefit!

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 15:13 UTC (Fri) by jannic (subscriber, #5821) [Link] (3 responses)

Ouch, didn't know that. I mean, dynamic IPs are normal here, as well. But at least they are real IPs, not NAT. And getting a static IP isn't very expensive, either, in many cases. E.g. the option costs 5€/month for the DSL line I'm using at the moment.

I guess it's because we are in the lucky situation that in the cities, there are usually two or three providers available to choose from. (At least some kind of DSL connection and a cable based offer.)

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 15:32 UTC (Fri) by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435) [Link] (2 responses)

Actually, I may have misunderstood... When you say NAT, do you mean the ISP is doing its own internal NAT'ing, such that several of its customers are all sharing a single real public IP? That, thankfully, isn't very common around here, that I know of... I just meant most people get a single public IPv4 (which changes regularly), and end up doing their own NAT on it (well, or the ISP does it for them with the supplied modem/router), such that all devices on their internal LAN are using non-public IPs...

I really, really long for the pre-NAT days, when every host had a publically addressable IP!

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 18:43 UTC (Fri) by jannic (subscriber, #5821) [Link] (1 responses)

Yes, exactly, large number of customers with single IP address. So you can't even configure port forwarding. Impossible to run even a small private server behind such a thing.

Of course you can run the server on the native IPv6 address you get. But then you can't access it when you are on an IPv4 only network. (Like, say, from your mobile phone...)

They call it 'carrier-grade NAT' to make it sound like it's something good.

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 20:20 UTC (Fri) by ewan (guest, #5533) [Link]

This actually sounds like the best configuration to encourage IPv6 adoption.

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 24, 2014 14:34 UTC (Sun) by Arker (guest, #14205) [Link]

That does vary. My ISP permits at least 4 (I think it was actually 6) different IPs on my home connection. So I can run a 4 port switch, use 3 IPs, including one for the router, and any extra devices attach via the router. Works quite well.

Unfortunately the largest ISPs also seem to be the worst ISPs, and they are the ones that are growing. :(

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 20:17 UTC (Fri) by danieldk (subscriber, #27876) [Link]

We are on Kabel BW in Germany, and have native IPV6 and DS-Lite. DS-Lite is a bit inconvenient, since we don't have a unique IP address, we cannot do port forwarding, etc. That said, I am happy we are on IPv6 :).

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 17:43 UTC (Fri) by lambda (subscriber, #40735) [Link] (2 responses)

Comcast has rolled it out to a pretty substantial fraction of its customers by now. I recall that I had been waiting expectantly for it, and tunneling in the meantime. A few months ago, I decided to check again, and sure enough they offer IPv6 in my region now. I turned off my tunnel and turned on native v6 and have been using it ever since.

It's a lot more than "a few users in select areas" by now; it's pretty much "all users with up-to-date modems and routers, in areas with up-to-date CMTS systems." As the equipment turns over, pretty much everyone getting new equipment is getting IPv6 support.

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 22, 2014 18:01 UTC (Fri) by RobSeace (subscriber, #4435) [Link] (1 responses)

If true, that's awesome! You'd think they'd make a bit more noise about it, though, and maybe inform all their existing customers about it so that they could get new equipment if necessary and start using it...

I still can't seem to find any info about business class static IPv6s being available, though... I can find mention of them doing limited business class testing, but apparently of dynamic(?!) IPv6 addresses? (WTF is the point of that?? Give everyone a static /64, at least!) So, no joy for us yet, I guess...

But, it's good the consumer class is making progress, at least!

IPv6 US rollout

Posted Aug 23, 2014 0:29 UTC (Sat) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]

There's no reason why the average consumer (say, my mother) would want to know about IPv6. These are people for whom the distinctions between Windows (an operating system) the PC (hardware) and Microsoft (a company) are difficult to discern, never mind knowing Internet Explorer from Firefox, both of which they will just call "Google" or if you're lucky "The Internet".

Imagine trying to get a non-technical friend or relative excited about the end of the Big Kernel Lock. Most likely if you manage they'll end with a bunch of misconceptions that are perhaps worse than if they'd remained ignorant.

In the ideal world the transition would have begun about a decade ago, most people today would already have working IPv6 and the discussions would now be about how quickly and easily we can begin the far end of the transition, deprecating IPv4 and removing it from the core, and my mother _still_ wouldn't know about it.