6 ms·

> Is Your Internet Up-To-date? Of course it isn't. I live in the UK.

wrboyce 10y ago
Mine is, and I live in the UK also. I'm not sure what joke you're making. Sure, we may not have the best bandwidth (although at my previous house I had 250MBit), but supporting IPv6 (etc) has nothing to do with being in the UK. Find a decent ISP, I recommend Zen (or if you can afford them, AA).
- alicewales 10y ago
  I can get an unreliable 3Mbps with the wind in the right direction on Openreach, or anything up to 200Mbps on Virgin Media. I'd rather not use VM's heavily filtered IPv6-free zone, but it's not a question of not being able to afford a decent ISP, it's just practicality.
  - dx034 10y ago
    I use Virgin Media and have no problems on any of my devices. Downlink can be a bit slower at busy times, but I guess that's nature of cable internet and uplink is always at the limit. And I really like that they very rarely change IP addresses (have mine for at least 3 months now). I have the feeling that Sky has slightly better peering (more stable speed to US & Asia during peak hours), but the higher speed on VM is more important here, and ping times are generally very low. What do you mean with IPv6-free zone? Have ipv6 disabled on my PC (for different reasons) but haven't experienced any connectivity problems on either Computers or other devices (which should be able to use IPv6). IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4?
    - icebraining 10y ago
      IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4? And there won't be while ISPs are lagging in their adoption, meaning nobody can set up a IPv6-only site if they expect to be accessible by everyone. Also, there's more than sites: an IPv4-only client can't connecting directly (P2P) to other clients behind carrier-grade IPv4 NAT, which leads to more centralized systems (and which give an advantage to large companies over more independent developers and open source groups). These ISPs are holding everyone back, hence the site submitted in this thread.
      - dx034 10y ago
        I know that NATs were not designed as security features, but I'm not sure if we want to have every device out there to have an IP address without NAT. I think that this would bear massive potential for botnets to take over older machines. And replacing NATs with firewalls would ultimately lead to the same problem with P2P. It's unfortunate for people with more technical knowledge, but most people don't have that, and there is point protecting them from attacks (even if it's their fault that they didn't update).
      - zeristor 10y ago
        Perhaps only test pages: http://ipv6.google.com/ http://ipv6.google.com/
- tluyben2 10y ago
  Depends where you live. In Storrington the internet is rubbish and no phone signal. This is 2017 UK. Driving to London from that region you lose mobile signal at least 5 times completely. People act so entitled when they live in cities; I happen not to like cities which makes me a minority, but there are plenty of wealthy business people crying every day about their connection south of London (and probably in more places; most places around Exeter aren't great either).
  - lucaspiller 10y ago
    My parents live in a Dorset village and have the same issues. I'm on Three and even in the nearest towns (Dorchester, pop. 20k and Weymouth, pop. 50k) there is usually no or a very weak signal. They finally rolled out BT Infinity last year, so at least that's something. I live in Lithuania now and it really shocks me how bad the UK is for these things. Here I have 600/600 FTTH for €20/month and LTE is basically universal, even in remote parts of the country.
    - DaiPlusPlus 10y ago
      It's cheap in Lithuania and other countries because they were was no significant prior investment in telecoms infrastructure, and the costs of deployment are generally lower too (cheaper labour, easier planning-permission) - so when it comes to deploying Internet access to a previously disconnected community it only makes sense to roll-out the bleeding-edge technology (e.g. FTTH). Whereas in the UK, BT was/is obsessed with squeezing every last drop of bandwidth from POTS connections - because the cost of upgrading everyone's last-mile connections from copper (or even aluminium in some cases) to fibre is very cost-prohibitive: look at the sheer cost the cablecos shouldered during the mass roll-out of coax in the early-1990s (and even then, it was only to boxes in the street, not houses) - I understand their near-bankruptcy from this move lead to them all coming together under NTL and Telewest, and then Virgin Media. (The only thing that is inexplicable is how even modern, brand-new housing developments still have unshielded copper last-mile connections instead of FTTH: they don't even lay conduits to make it easier for possible future FTTH... idiocy) Give the UK a few more years and there should be a mandate from above requiring FTTH and we'll see progress: maybe even 10Gig FTTH as standard, then the tables will turn and people in Lithuania will be stuck with their 1Gbps service until their next round of major infrastructure investment, potentially decades away. (I'm aware that Fibre is generally more future-proof than copper, and a high-quality fibre line that handles 1Gbps today can easily handle 10Gbps, and potentially 40Gbps or even 100Gbps in the future - so my entire argument may be moot)
- aneeshnl 10y ago
  I live in India and having 4 Mbps, which is a luxury. Not ready for IPv6. Situation is improving a lot recently though.
  - eb0la 10y ago
    Probably you'll get IPv6 in India sooner than people in Europe. I've read that the last mile in India is not yet liberalised and that's a huge growth factor in Internet usage. Once this barrier falls, invesment in network equipment (IPv6-enabled) will follow. Older, aka "mature" markets like Europe need some kind on incentive to switch to IPv6. Usually goverment subsidies...
- Magnets 10y ago
  It's good if you have FTTC, it's very patchy if you don't
alexdumitru 10y ago
Come to Romania. We have IPv6, 1Gbps for just ~6 pounds. And as a bonus I got two 3G SIM cards + usb modems with unlimited traffic entirely free. http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png
- eumoria 10y ago
  O.o I'm in New York City which for America has pretty decent fiber service and 100mbit costs ~61 pounds ($75). Very jealous!
  - qubitcoder 10y ago
    For what it's worth, I'm getting 1,000Mbps with AT&T Fiber for $75 a month. I'm located just an hour northwest of Atlanta, in Rome, Georgia.
    - ubertaco 10y ago
      Over in Cherokee County, meanwhile, it's $70/mo with Comcast for 75Mbps. I was hopeful for a Google Fiber rollout when they announced it, but no dice.
      - brb3 10y ago
        I'm paying $100/mo for gigabit fiber through Ringgold Telephone Company. I'm in Ringgold, GA (right on the Tennessee border, south of Chattanooga).
      - a_brawling_boo 10y ago
        I don't think that Google is expanding any further in the atlanta market, but I am in Kennesaw, and have AT&T fiber which is pretty decent.
  - deathanatos 10y ago
    I'm in Silicon Valley, and outside of SF (where the ISP market isn't a monopoly), a gigabit from Comcast costs ~$300/mo. It still seems absurd to me that I'm 20 minutes from companies like Apple and Google, but getting decent ≥100Mbps Internet is expensive and challenging. (I pay for "business class" however, so my bill is slightly more expensive per Mbps because of that (the $300/mo above is residential, though). But I get an almost nearly static IPv4 address, and customer support that's only moderately bad, as opposed to the residential level support which beyond bad.)

Mine is, and I live in the UK also. I'm not sure what joke you're making. Sure, we may not have the best bandwidth (although at my previous house I had 250MBit), but supporting IPv6 (etc) has nothing to do with being in the UK. Find a decent ISP, I recommend Zen (or if you can afford them, AA).

alicewales 10y ago
I can get an unreliable 3Mbps with the wind in the right direction on Openreach, or anything up to 200Mbps on Virgin Media. I'd rather not use VM's heavily filtered IPv6-free zone, but it's not a question of not being able to afford a decent ISP, it's just practicality.
- dx034 10y ago
  I use Virgin Media and have no problems on any of my devices. Downlink can be a bit slower at busy times, but I guess that's nature of cable internet and uplink is always at the limit. And I really like that they very rarely change IP addresses (have mine for at least 3 months now). I have the feeling that Sky has slightly better peering (more stable speed to US & Asia during peak hours), but the higher speed on VM is more important here, and ping times are generally very low. What do you mean with IPv6-free zone? Have ipv6 disabled on my PC (for different reasons) but haven't experienced any connectivity problems on either Computers or other devices (which should be able to use IPv6). IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4?
  - icebraining 10y ago
    IF you mean missing availability of ipv6, I don't think that there are any pages you can't see on ipv4? And there won't be while ISPs are lagging in their adoption, meaning nobody can set up a IPv6-only site if they expect to be accessible by everyone. Also, there's more than sites: an IPv4-only client can't connecting directly (P2P) to other clients behind carrier-grade IPv4 NAT, which leads to more centralized systems (and which give an advantage to large companies over more independent developers and open source groups). These ISPs are holding everyone back, hence the site submitted in this thread.
    - dx034 10y ago
      I know that NATs were not designed as security features, but I'm not sure if we want to have every device out there to have an IP address without NAT. I think that this would bear massive potential for botnets to take over older machines. And replacing NATs with firewalls would ultimately lead to the same problem with P2P. It's unfortunate for people with more technical knowledge, but most people don't have that, and there is point protecting them from attacks (even if it's their fault that they didn't update).
    - zeristor 10y ago
      Perhaps only test pages: http://ipv6.google.com/ http://ipv6.google.com/
tluyben2 10y ago
Depends where you live. In Storrington the internet is rubbish and no phone signal. This is 2017 UK. Driving to London from that region you lose mobile signal at least 5 times completely. People act so entitled when they live in cities; I happen not to like cities which makes me a minority, but there are plenty of wealthy business people crying every day about their connection south of London (and probably in more places; most places around Exeter aren't great either).
- lucaspiller 10y ago
  My parents live in a Dorset village and have the same issues. I'm on Three and even in the nearest towns (Dorchester, pop. 20k and Weymouth, pop. 50k) there is usually no or a very weak signal. They finally rolled out BT Infinity last year, so at least that's something. I live in Lithuania now and it really shocks me how bad the UK is for these things. Here I have 600/600 FTTH for €20/month and LTE is basically universal, even in remote parts of the country.
  - DaiPlusPlus 10y ago
    It's cheap in Lithuania and other countries because they were was no significant prior investment in telecoms infrastructure, and the costs of deployment are generally lower too (cheaper labour, easier planning-permission) - so when it comes to deploying Internet access to a previously disconnected community it only makes sense to roll-out the bleeding-edge technology (e.g. FTTH). Whereas in the UK, BT was/is obsessed with squeezing every last drop of bandwidth from POTS connections - because the cost of upgrading everyone's last-mile connections from copper (or even aluminium in some cases) to fibre is very cost-prohibitive: look at the sheer cost the cablecos shouldered during the mass roll-out of coax in the early-1990s (and even then, it was only to boxes in the street, not houses) - I understand their near-bankruptcy from this move lead to them all coming together under NTL and Telewest, and then Virgin Media. (The only thing that is inexplicable is how even modern, brand-new housing developments still have unshielded copper last-mile connections instead of FTTH: they don't even lay conduits to make it easier for possible future FTTH... idiocy) Give the UK a few more years and there should be a mandate from above requiring FTTH and we'll see progress: maybe even 10Gig FTTH as standard, then the tables will turn and people in Lithuania will be stuck with their 1Gbps service until their next round of major infrastructure investment, potentially decades away. (I'm aware that Fibre is generally more future-proof than copper, and a high-quality fibre line that handles 1Gbps today can easily handle 10Gbps, and potentially 40Gbps or even 100Gbps in the future - so my entire argument may be moot)
aneeshnl 10y ago
I live in India and having 4 Mbps, which is a luxury. Not ready for IPv6. Situation is improving a lot recently though.
- eb0la 10y ago
  Probably you'll get IPv6 in India sooner than people in Europe. I've read that the last mile in India is not yet liberalised and that's a huge growth factor in Internet usage. Once this barrier falls, invesment in network equipment (IPv6-enabled) will follow. Older, aka "mature" markets like Europe need some kind on incentive to switch to IPv6. Usually goverment subsidies...
Magnets 10y ago
It's good if you have FTTC, it's very patchy if you don't

alexdumitru 10y ago

Come to Romania. We have IPv6, 1Gbps for just ~6 pounds. And as a bonus I got two 3G SIM cards + usb modems with unlimited traffic entirely free. http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png http://www.speedtest.net/result/5951144497.png

eumoria 10y ago
O.o I'm in New York City which for America has pretty decent fiber service and 100mbit costs ~61 pounds ($75). Very jealous!
- qubitcoder 10y ago
  For what it's worth, I'm getting 1,000Mbps with AT&T Fiber for $75 a month. I'm located just an hour northwest of Atlanta, in Rome, Georgia.
  - ubertaco 10y ago
    Over in Cherokee County, meanwhile, it's $70/mo with Comcast for 75Mbps. I was hopeful for a Google Fiber rollout when they announced it, but no dice.
    - brb3 10y ago
      I'm paying $100/mo for gigabit fiber through Ringgold Telephone Company. I'm in Ringgold, GA (right on the Tennessee border, south of Chattanooga).
    - a_brawling_boo 10y ago
      I don't think that Google is expanding any further in the atlanta market, but I am in Kennesaw, and have AT&T fiber which is pretty decent.
- deathanatos 10y ago
  I'm in Silicon Valley, and outside of SF (where the ISP market isn't a monopoly), a gigabit from Comcast costs ~$300/mo. It still seems absurd to me that I'm 20 minutes from companies like Apple and Google, but getting decent ≥100Mbps Internet is expensive and challenging. (I pay for "business class" however, so my bill is slightly more expensive per Mbps because of that (the $300/mo above is residential, though). But I get an almost nearly static IPv4 address, and customer support that's only moderately bad, as opposed to the residential level support which beyond bad.)