28 ms·

But there is motivation for ISP to use IPv6. They save a ton of money on IP addresses, and they don't need the infrastructure to keep a NAT. And I don't mean o

But there is motivation for ISP to use IPv6. They save a ton of money on IP addresses, and they don't need the infrastructure to keep a NAT. And I don't mean only the cost of running it, in my country for example by law the ISP has to maintain a log for 5 or 10 years of all the IP addresses assigned to the user, and in case of a NAT even of all connection and source ports associated with each client. That is a cost that you will save with IPv6, just assigning an entire /64 subnet to every customer. Of course you will start to save money at the point where we can switch off IPv4, that is not something we will see tomorrow, but if we don't start, the problem will not become better with time, but worse. IPv6 is an investment for ISP, more than customers (that it's not true they don't care, they maybe don't understand the technical details, but when they find out that they can't play online with their PlayStation/Xbox because they are behind a NAT, they will complain to the ISP).

crazygringo 5y ago
> They save a ton of money on IP addresses, and they don't need the infrastructure to keep a NAT. I don't see that at all. Everyone still needs an IPv4 to the outside world for compatibility, and pretty much all the time 24/7, so they wouldn't be saving money at all. And why do they need a NAT? My NAT only happens on my personal router, not at the ISP level. It's not something that concerns the ISP at all. So I don't understand any of the motivation you're describing. (And if there are legal requirements around recording connections and ports and whatnot, you'll still have to record each connection made under IPv6 as well right? And may I ask where you live that every TCP connection you establish gets logged for 5-10 years? Recording your assigned IP address is one thing -- and for most people's home connections it rarely changes -- but I've never heard of recording every connection.)
- sleepydog 5y ago
  I agree with you. From an ISP's perspective I don't see why IPv6 would be cheaper. Any change at all, even a positive change, is expensive at the scale ISPs operate at. And NAT is cheap. One small thing, though: > My NAT only happens on my personal router, not at the ISP level. It's not something that concerns the ISP at all. "Carrier-grade" (what a laughable term) NAT exists. You are fortunate that your ISP does not implement it. Do you happen to have a business plan, or a gigabit plan? There is also ds-lite which I've read comcast uses extensively. Here customers get ipv6 addresses only, and share a pool of v4 addresses when they exit the ISP's network.
  - crazygringo 5y ago
    Just crappy-expensive regular Optimum in NYC, and Time Warner before that. No I've never had carrier NAT. People often need to connect to their home computers from the internet for various purposes -- remote desktop, media server, SSH, NAS, printing, whatever -- which carrier NAT wouldn't allow, as far as I understand it. I understand ISP's don't want you running high-traffic web servers on a home contract, but I thought it was still considered essential everywhere to at least be able to connect to your personal IP address from the internet for personal usage. (For home internet -- not mobile, obviously.)
    - sleepydog 5y ago
      > I thought it was still considered essential everywhere to at least be able to connect to your personal IP address from the internet for personal usage. Yes! CGN, asymmetric bandwidth plans, dynamic IP addresses, they're all treating the customer as a consumer. As if it's just a cable hookup. It's a shame, really. CGN shouldn't exist. UDP "hole-punching" would still work with CGN, but in most cases you would need cooperation of a third party. There are also trickier ways like what samy.pl/pwnat does. I'm on FIOS in NYC now, but when I was on optimum and spectrum they both gave me IPv6 delegations and, as far as I could tell, they never changed. Honestly I would not have switched to FIOS in hindsight -- it's not much better and I don't think I'll ever have IPv6 :(.
    - Symbiote 5y ago
      Plenty of people are stuck with CG-NAT – with (sometimes) the option of paying for a "business" connection with a routable IPv4 address. Customers of smaller/newer ISPs, or even larger ISPs in some countries, are affected. On IPv4, they are second-rate internet users, limited to consumption only. The world moving to IPv6 helps them, since they can then use the internet equally, running servers, remote desktop, etc. > And may I ask where you live that every TCP connection you establish gets logged for 5-10 years? The EU started doing this, then removed the obligation, then decided it was a threat to democracy and banned it [1]. But since Brexit happened, the UK can continue with whatever they're planning [2]. [2] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/internet-connection-records-ip-act https://www.wired.co.uk/article/internet-connection-records-... [1] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/eu-supreme-court-rules-data-retention-die-die-die/ https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/eu-supreme-court-...
- zepearl 5y ago
  > Everyone still needs an IPv4 to the outside world for compatibility... Is this really true/correct? Assuming that an ISP would implement a pure IPv6-network for its customers, wouldn't their customers by typing on their PCs e.g. "ping 1.2.3.4" in their terminals be routed automatically through "[internal IPv4 network between customer and ISP] => [ISP's public IPv6 address in Internet being translated to their SINGLE allocated IPv4-address] => [target's IPv4 address]", and then back (to get the ping-reply)? So, some kind of "magic" IPv4[internal customer]=>IPv4[internal ISP] => IPv6[external ISP]=>IPv4[external ISP] => IPv4[target], using NAT or however it's called? I'm absolutely not good in relation with networking, especially not IPv6 (in theory simple, that was at least the tone of the articles that I read a few years ago, but at that time it has been quite difficult for me to set it up on my root servers), so what I just wrote might be plain wrong :P
  - namibj 5y ago
    It's trivial to send packets from IPv6 to IPv4. The other direction doesn't work, because there isn't enough address space (32 bit for IPv4, 128 bit for IPv6).
- alerighi 5y ago
  > Everyone still needs an IPv4 to the outside world for compatibility, and pretty much all the time 24/7, so they wouldn't be saving money at all. Yes, but a more and more services pass to IPv6 you can start to resize your IPv4 infrastructure, and arrive at a point where you will switch it off entirely, as it was done for the transition from analog television to digital one (of course we talk about at least 20 years, but if we don't start it we would never see it). > And why do they need a NAT? My NAT only happens on my personal router, not at the ISP level. It's not something that concerns the ISP at all. They need a NAT because they don't have so many public IP address to give one to each customer. So they introduce a second level of NAT, where a group of customers share the same IPv4 public address. That of course causes a lot of problems, especially for online gaming where it's required to open ports, or in general for applications that use p2p protocols. And so if you want a public IP address dedicated to your connection you have to pay more. I don't know the situation in the US, perhaps your IPS have a ton of public IP addresses they purchased in the past so they can afford to assign to each customer one dedicated address, in my country it's no longer the case with most home connection ISP (and all the mobile ones). > (And if there are legal requirements around recording connections and ports and whatnot, you'll still have to record each connection made under IPv6 as well right? And may I ask where you live that every TCP connection you establish gets logged for 5-10 years? Recording your assigned IP address is one thing -- and for most people's home connections it rarely changes -- but I've never heard of recording every connection.) No you don't. The law requires you be able in case of a crime to identify the customer that originated a particular connection. It means that the police goes to the ISP with the time, IP address and source port of the connection and the IPS has to tell the identity of the customer. The method how this is achieved depends on the technology used. With an IPv4 with public dynamic address, they have to maintain the log of the PPPoE connections, to know at one time the customer that had that address. Not that difficult. With an IPv4 with a NAT, a group of users shares an address, thus the information of only the address is not sufficient to identify the customer that did that connection. So they have to log all the connection opened by the customer, so they an know, from the IP address and the source port of the connection from which customer originated the connection. With IPv6, you don't have any of these problems. With so many addresses you can just statically allocate a /64 block of IP addresses to each customer, and basically don't keep any dynamic record. Of course it's also better for the customer since he has a static IP address if he wants to self host something at home, without using unreliable dynamic DNS services. And nowadays with all the new IoT and domotic stuff having a public address is important (for example just think about accessing security cameras remotely).

crazygringo 5y ago

> They save a ton of money on IP addresses, and they don't need the infrastructure to keep a NAT. I don't see that at all. Everyone still needs an IPv4 to the outside world for compatibility, and pretty much all the time 24/7, so they wouldn't be saving money at all. And why do they need a NAT? My NAT only happens on my personal router, not at the ISP level. It's not something that concerns the ISP at all. So I don't understand any of the motivation you're describing. (And if there are legal requirements around recording connections and ports and whatnot, you'll still have to record each connection made under IPv6 as well right? And may I ask where you live that every TCP connection you establish gets logged for 5-10 years? Recording your assigned IP address is one thing -- and for most people's home connections it rarely changes -- but I've never heard of recording every connection.)

sleepydog 5y ago
I agree with you. From an ISP's perspective I don't see why IPv6 would be cheaper. Any change at all, even a positive change, is expensive at the scale ISPs operate at. And NAT is cheap. One small thing, though: > My NAT only happens on my personal router, not at the ISP level. It's not something that concerns the ISP at all. "Carrier-grade" (what a laughable term) NAT exists. You are fortunate that your ISP does not implement it. Do you happen to have a business plan, or a gigabit plan? There is also ds-lite which I've read comcast uses extensively. Here customers get ipv6 addresses only, and share a pool of v4 addresses when they exit the ISP's network.
- crazygringo 5y ago
  Just crappy-expensive regular Optimum in NYC, and Time Warner before that. No I've never had carrier NAT. People often need to connect to their home computers from the internet for various purposes -- remote desktop, media server, SSH, NAS, printing, whatever -- which carrier NAT wouldn't allow, as far as I understand it. I understand ISP's don't want you running high-traffic web servers on a home contract, but I thought it was still considered essential everywhere to at least be able to connect to your personal IP address from the internet for personal usage. (For home internet -- not mobile, obviously.)
  - sleepydog 5y ago
    > I thought it was still considered essential everywhere to at least be able to connect to your personal IP address from the internet for personal usage. Yes! CGN, asymmetric bandwidth plans, dynamic IP addresses, they're all treating the customer as a consumer. As if it's just a cable hookup. It's a shame, really. CGN shouldn't exist. UDP "hole-punching" would still work with CGN, but in most cases you would need cooperation of a third party. There are also trickier ways like what samy.pl/pwnat does. I'm on FIOS in NYC now, but when I was on optimum and spectrum they both gave me IPv6 delegations and, as far as I could tell, they never changed. Honestly I would not have switched to FIOS in hindsight -- it's not much better and I don't think I'll ever have IPv6 :(.
  - Symbiote 5y ago
    Plenty of people are stuck with CG-NAT – with (sometimes) the option of paying for a "business" connection with a routable IPv4 address. Customers of smaller/newer ISPs, or even larger ISPs in some countries, are affected. On IPv4, they are second-rate internet users, limited to consumption only. The world moving to IPv6 helps them, since they can then use the internet equally, running servers, remote desktop, etc. > And may I ask where you live that every TCP connection you establish gets logged for 5-10 years? The EU started doing this, then removed the obligation, then decided it was a threat to democracy and banned it [1]. But since Brexit happened, the UK can continue with whatever they're planning [2]. [2] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/internet-connection-records-ip-act https://www.wired.co.uk/article/internet-connection-records-... [1] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/eu-supreme-court-rules-data-retention-die-die-die/ https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/eu-supreme-court-...
zepearl 5y ago
> Everyone still needs an IPv4 to the outside world for compatibility... Is this really true/correct? Assuming that an ISP would implement a pure IPv6-network for its customers, wouldn't their customers by typing on their PCs e.g. "ping 1.2.3.4" in their terminals be routed automatically through "[internal IPv4 network between customer and ISP] => [ISP's public IPv6 address in Internet being translated to their SINGLE allocated IPv4-address] => [target's IPv4 address]", and then back (to get the ping-reply)? So, some kind of "magic" IPv4[internal customer]=>IPv4[internal ISP] => IPv6[external ISP]=>IPv4[external ISP] => IPv4[target], using NAT or however it's called? I'm absolutely not good in relation with networking, especially not IPv6 (in theory simple, that was at least the tone of the articles that I read a few years ago, but at that time it has been quite difficult for me to set it up on my root servers), so what I just wrote might be plain wrong :P
- namibj 5y ago
  It's trivial to send packets from IPv6 to IPv4. The other direction doesn't work, because there isn't enough address space (32 bit for IPv4, 128 bit for IPv6).
alerighi 5y ago
> Everyone still needs an IPv4 to the outside world for compatibility, and pretty much all the time 24/7, so they wouldn't be saving money at all. Yes, but a more and more services pass to IPv6 you can start to resize your IPv4 infrastructure, and arrive at a point where you will switch it off entirely, as it was done for the transition from analog television to digital one (of course we talk about at least 20 years, but if we don't start it we would never see it). > And why do they need a NAT? My NAT only happens on my personal router, not at the ISP level. It's not something that concerns the ISP at all. They need a NAT because they don't have so many public IP address to give one to each customer. So they introduce a second level of NAT, where a group of customers share the same IPv4 public address. That of course causes a lot of problems, especially for online gaming where it's required to open ports, or in general for applications that use p2p protocols. And so if you want a public IP address dedicated to your connection you have to pay more. I don't know the situation in the US, perhaps your IPS have a ton of public IP addresses they purchased in the past so they can afford to assign to each customer one dedicated address, in my country it's no longer the case with most home connection ISP (and all the mobile ones). > (And if there are legal requirements around recording connections and ports and whatnot, you'll still have to record each connection made under IPv6 as well right? And may I ask where you live that every TCP connection you establish gets logged for 5-10 years? Recording your assigned IP address is one thing -- and for most people's home connections it rarely changes -- but I've never heard of recording every connection.) No you don't. The law requires you be able in case of a crime to identify the customer that originated a particular connection. It means that the police goes to the ISP with the time, IP address and source port of the connection and the IPS has to tell the identity of the customer. The method how this is achieved depends on the technology used. With an IPv4 with public dynamic address, they have to maintain the log of the PPPoE connections, to know at one time the customer that had that address. Not that difficult. With an IPv4 with a NAT, a group of users shares an address, thus the information of only the address is not sufficient to identify the customer that did that connection. So they have to log all the connection opened by the customer, so they an know, from the IP address and the source port of the connection from which customer originated the connection. With IPv6, you don't have any of these problems. With so many addresses you can just statically allocate a /64 block of IP addresses to each customer, and basically don't keep any dynamic record. Of course it's also better for the customer since he has a static IP address if he wants to self host something at home, without using unreliable dynamic DNS services. And nowadays with all the new IoT and domotic stuff having a public address is important (for example just think about accessing security cameras remotely).