3 ms·

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 ope

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-...

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-...