3 ms·

Real IPv6 deployment is held up because of the 50-100 biggest ISPs in North America and Europe. Get them to start taking this seriously and everything else fall

Real IPv6 deployment is held up because of the 50-100 biggest ISPs in North America and Europe. Get them to start taking this seriously and everything else falls into line over night. The IETF barking out other suggestions is just a distraction.

stephen_g 9y ago
Don't worry, this is just a random submission from someone who also came up with the 'new' idea of accessing the Internet through satellites this year... (Posted above - https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omar-si-00 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omar-si-00) It's not going to be seriously considered (it doesn't make sense anyway - upgrading to this protocol would be the same effort as upgrading to IPv6 - it's entirely pointless).
- thechao 9y ago
  Just to be clear: the satellites in his network are plugged in. That's novel AF.
  - MertsA 9y ago
    I think the funniest part is that fiber optics are irrelevant in space, you'd be better off just pointing a laser at another satellite and just using space as the medium.
philjohn 9y ago
The UK is pretty much there on IPV6 - BT (and by extension anyone who uses BT's network, so, everyone except Virgin Cable and Kingston Communications in Hull) now offers native IPV6 - you get delegated a /56 (albeit a dynamic /56 allocation for most). The tricky part is router support - BT's own equipment supports it for the most part (Only the Smart Hub and Home Hub 5), but third party routers can be difficult - TPLink still only support /64 prefixes on their current firmware, and their firewall doesn't work properly when using their beta firmware that supports /56 prefixes. So - the infrastructure is there, but support is variable.
- beojan 9y ago
  Don't most areas have local loop unbundling, so you're on your ISP's network rather than BT's?
  - philjohn 9y ago
    Sorry, just seen this. Partly - FTTC is run over BT's network all the way through to 27 regional POPs where it is passed over to the providers network, or they can opt to use the BT network instead.
topranks 9y ago
From where I'm standing the big problem is enterprises not moving. Most big ISPs run IPv6, and many provide IPv6 to their end customers. In the US Google see 35% of connections coming in to them over IPv6. But convincing the average small-medium enterprise to enable it on their routers (which isn't automatic as is the case with home connections,) is proving difficult.
- snuxoll 9y ago
  > But convincing the average small-medium enterprise to enable it on their routers (which isn't automatic as is the case with home connections,) is proving difficult. We're setting up a new SQL Server cluster, we literally disabled IPv6 in Windows because "we don't use it" - meanwhile I have 6 separate /24's assigned to my team that are a pain in the butt to manage just to ensure I don't run out of addresses. My life would be so much easier if I just had a v6 /64 for dev/test and another /64 for staging and production.

stephen_g 9y ago

Don't worry, this is just a random submission from someone who also came up with the 'new' idea of accessing the Internet through satellites this year... (Posted above - https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omar-si-00 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omar-si-00) It's not going to be seriously considered (it doesn't make sense anyway - upgrading to this protocol would be the same effort as upgrading to IPv6 - it's entirely pointless).

thechao 9y ago
Just to be clear: the satellites in his network are plugged in. That's novel AF.
- MertsA 9y ago
  I think the funniest part is that fiber optics are irrelevant in space, you'd be better off just pointing a laser at another satellite and just using space as the medium.

philjohn 9y ago

The UK is pretty much there on IPV6 - BT (and by extension anyone who uses BT's network, so, everyone except Virgin Cable and Kingston Communications in Hull) now offers native IPV6 - you get delegated a /56 (albeit a dynamic /56 allocation for most). The tricky part is router support - BT's own equipment supports it for the most part (Only the Smart Hub and Home Hub 5), but third party routers can be difficult - TPLink still only support /64 prefixes on their current firmware, and their firewall doesn't work properly when using their beta firmware that supports /56 prefixes. So - the infrastructure is there, but support is variable.

beojan 9y ago
Don't most areas have local loop unbundling, so you're on your ISP's network rather than BT's?
- philjohn 9y ago
  Sorry, just seen this. Partly - FTTC is run over BT's network all the way through to 27 regional POPs where it is passed over to the providers network, or they can opt to use the BT network instead.

topranks 9y ago

From where I'm standing the big problem is enterprises not moving. Most big ISPs run IPv6, and many provide IPv6 to their end customers. In the US Google see 35% of connections coming in to them over IPv6. But convincing the average small-medium enterprise to enable it on their routers (which isn't automatic as is the case with home connections,) is proving difficult.

snuxoll 9y ago
> But convincing the average small-medium enterprise to enable it on their routers (which isn't automatic as is the case with home connections,) is proving difficult. We're setting up a new SQL Server cluster, we literally disabled IPv6 in Windows because "we don't use it" - meanwhile I have 6 separate /24's assigned to my team that are a pain in the butt to manage just to ensure I don't run out of addresses. My life would be so much easier if I just had a v6 /64 for dev/test and another /64 for staging and production.