5 ms·

It would be nice if the Aussie broadband market would start enabling IPv6 but the pessimist in me thinks they'll just turn on CG-NAT and call it a day. Since m

by LIV2 7y ago

It would be nice if the Aussie broadband market would start enabling IPv6 but the pessimist in me thinks they'll just turn on CG-NAT and call it a day. Since most consumers don't care, and CG-NAT bandaids the problem I don't see how the market will be motivated to spend the time/money to bring us IPv6. We're probably going to be stuck with shitty bandaid solutions for a while

danpalmer 7y ago
I’m visiting Australia at the moment and the state of internet connectivity in central Melbourne is pretty poor. Very slow internet at my AirBnBs, generally very poor WiFi availability and speeds in public, the co-working space I’m in (that is otherwise excellent) is a similar speed to my home connection in London. Above all, latency makes some websites considerably less pleasant to use, and SSH to most places is painful. I know that’s not something the local market can necessarily fix though.
- isostatic 7y ago
  I've thought about working in Aus for a few months over a (northern) winter - what visa did you get?
  - danpalmer 7y ago
    I got a regular tourist visa. My main reason for visiting is seeing people, and I'm just doing a bit of remote work for a UK based company during time that I'm not seeing people. I'm not being paid in Aus, still being paid at home in £. I don't believe that counts as "working in Australia". I'm here for 1 month, I think the tourist visa allows you to visit for up to 3 months. This is not visa advice.
- koyote 7y ago
  As someone who moved to Australia from London, I can confirm: the latency is the real killer. I'm one of the few lucky ones with FTTP which gets me close to 100mbit speeds. But as soon as I have to connect to a server outside of Oz I am pretty much back to (high) ADSL speeds. Latency to the US and Singapore (the two closest international backbones) is around 150-200ms. It's around double that for Europe. At peak times those backbones get very congested. Funnily the only country I've been to that has faster and more consistent 4g was Japan.
  - danpalmer 7y ago
    100MB is still not great for business premises. At home in London I'm on 80MB fibre, and get ~76MB during peak times. At work in London we have 1GB (and typically get 1.2GB) between ~80 people. This co-working space is ~85MB for a similar number of people.
Arbalest 7y ago
They did have it available opt in for a short while, but it broke so they stopped doing it.
revilo951 7y ago
I have a service with Aussie broadband, and I'm participating in the IPv6 beta. It's being activity worked on. The staff are highly communicative with those in the beta. It's been great so far.
- LIV2 7y ago
  Aussie Broadband seem to be the only ISP that puts any effort in and cares about their customers, I hope they don't get bought and become another part of TPG
  - jazoom 7y ago
    They've stuffed up my billing every month for 12 months now. I've told them numerous times and they still can't fix whatever problem they have. I'm glad other people are having more luck with them.
tialaramex 7y ago
CG-NAT doesn't help you internally, which is why big US ISPs went to IPv6. For your own infrastructure, re-using the same addresses over and over, as in a CG-NAT scheme, makes it far easier for mistakes to happen and far harder to diagnose them. Your network becomes a fragile component that your own network engineers are frightened to touch, hurting your ability to compete as a network provider. What's 10.20.30.40? Your own notes show you use 10.20.30.40 in Sector A of the country for a Cisco router but you also named a different device, a microwave transceiver in Sector B of the country 10.20.30.40 with the NAT supposedly separating the two. So packets supposedly "from" 10.20.30.40 could be the Cisco router playing up again, but they could be that microwave transceiver misbehaving, or they could be CPE leaking a customer's internal addresses into your CG-NAT network. If you try to "solve" this over the network you might end up talking to a "different" 10.20.30.40 than the one causing problems and make things worse. Once you realise you want IPv6 internally, it's not a huge leap to realise that you might as well at least _offer_ this to customers too.
- rahimnathwani 7y ago
  There are <20M address in the IPv4 private address space, vs. maybe ~100M smartphones in the USA. So, yes, you need to reuse addresses internally if you have more than 20% market share. But until all web sites and services have migrated to IPv6, each smartphone still needs an IPv4 address, right? How does introducing IPv6 internally solve the problem you described, if a significant portion of traffic is still using IPv4?
  - berti 7y ago
    I remember reading a few articles about a US mobile carrier successfully going IPv6 only with 464XLAT. Turns out my memory was correct and it was T-Mobile [0]. [0] https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-mobile-us-goes-ipv6-only-using-464xlat/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/deploy360/2014/cas...
  - Nyandalized 7y ago
    I believe every effort should be done to further the transition and make it less cumbersome in the future. Just the mental effect of "we're already partially using it" is invaluable
gwillz 7y ago
Legit Internode had native ipv6 enabled by default since 2008. Whirlpool still exists also. https://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/hw_feature_242 https://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/hw_feature_242
- LIV2 7y ago
  I had read that they aren't doing IPv6 on NBN connections though? It seems that there has been a bit more adoption of it since I last checked which must have been a while ago, I'm surprised to see Telstra on the list!
paranoidrobot 7y ago
I'm 'stuck' on Internode as they're still the only carrier that I can get that'll offer IPv6 on NBN fibre for a decent price. Even the rest of TPG's sub-brands don't offer v6. It's painful.

by LIV2 7y ago

danpalmer 7y ago

I’m visiting Australia at the moment and the state of internet connectivity in central Melbourne is pretty poor. Very slow internet at my AirBnBs, generally very poor WiFi availability and speeds in public, the co-working space I’m in (that is otherwise excellent) is a similar speed to my home connection in London. Above all, latency makes some websites considerably less pleasant to use, and SSH to most places is painful. I know that’s not something the local market can necessarily fix though.

isostatic 7y ago
I've thought about working in Aus for a few months over a (northern) winter - what visa did you get?
- danpalmer 7y ago
  I got a regular tourist visa. My main reason for visiting is seeing people, and I'm just doing a bit of remote work for a UK based company during time that I'm not seeing people. I'm not being paid in Aus, still being paid at home in £. I don't believe that counts as "working in Australia". I'm here for 1 month, I think the tourist visa allows you to visit for up to 3 months. This is not visa advice.
koyote 7y ago
As someone who moved to Australia from London, I can confirm: the latency is the real killer. I'm one of the few lucky ones with FTTP which gets me close to 100mbit speeds. But as soon as I have to connect to a server outside of Oz I am pretty much back to (high) ADSL speeds. Latency to the US and Singapore (the two closest international backbones) is around 150-200ms. It's around double that for Europe. At peak times those backbones get very congested. Funnily the only country I've been to that has faster and more consistent 4g was Japan.
- danpalmer 7y ago
  100MB is still not great for business premises. At home in London I'm on 80MB fibre, and get ~76MB during peak times. At work in London we have 1GB (and typically get 1.2GB) between ~80 people. This co-working space is ~85MB for a similar number of people.

Arbalest 7y ago

They did have it available opt in for a short while, but it broke so they stopped doing it.

revilo951 7y ago

I have a service with Aussie broadband, and I'm participating in the IPv6 beta. It's being activity worked on. The staff are highly communicative with those in the beta. It's been great so far.

LIV2 7y ago
Aussie Broadband seem to be the only ISP that puts any effort in and cares about their customers, I hope they don't get bought and become another part of TPG
- jazoom 7y ago
  They've stuffed up my billing every month for 12 months now. I've told them numerous times and they still can't fix whatever problem they have. I'm glad other people are having more luck with them.

tialaramex 7y ago

CG-NAT doesn't help you internally, which is why big US ISPs went to IPv6. For your own infrastructure, re-using the same addresses over and over, as in a CG-NAT scheme, makes it far easier for mistakes to happen and far harder to diagnose them. Your network becomes a fragile component that your own network engineers are frightened to touch, hurting your ability to compete as a network provider. What's 10.20.30.40? Your own notes show you use 10.20.30.40 in Sector A of the country for a Cisco router but you also named a different device, a microwave transceiver in Sector B of the country 10.20.30.40 with the NAT supposedly separating the two. So packets supposedly "from" 10.20.30.40 could be the Cisco router playing up again, but they could be that microwave transceiver misbehaving, or they could be CPE leaking a customer's internal addresses into your CG-NAT network. If you try to "solve" this over the network you might end up talking to a "different" 10.20.30.40 than the one causing problems and make things worse. Once you realise you want IPv6 internally, it's not a huge leap to realise that you might as well at least _offer_ this to customers too.

rahimnathwani 7y ago
There are <20M address in the IPv4 private address space, vs. maybe ~100M smartphones in the USA. So, yes, you need to reuse addresses internally if you have more than 20% market share. But until all web sites and services have migrated to IPv6, each smartphone still needs an IPv4 address, right? How does introducing IPv6 internally solve the problem you described, if a significant portion of traffic is still using IPv4?
- berti 7y ago
  I remember reading a few articles about a US mobile carrier successfully going IPv6 only with 464XLAT. Turns out my memory was correct and it was T-Mobile [0]. [0] https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-mobile-us-goes-ipv6-only-using-464xlat/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/deploy360/2014/cas...
- Nyandalized 7y ago
  I believe every effort should be done to further the transition and make it less cumbersome in the future. Just the mental effect of "we're already partially using it" is invaluable

gwillz 7y ago

Legit Internode had native ipv6 enabled by default since 2008. Whirlpool still exists also. https://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/hw_feature_242 https://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/hw_feature_242

LIV2 7y ago
I had read that they aren't doing IPv6 on NBN connections though? It seems that there has been a bit more adoption of it since I last checked which must have been a while ago, I'm surprised to see Telstra on the list!

paranoidrobot 7y ago

I'm 'stuck' on Internode as they're still the only carrier that I can get that'll offer IPv6 on NBN fibre for a decent price. Even the rest of TPG's sub-brands don't offer v6. It's painful.