4 ms·
This is unfortunately going to be just the first of many consumer ISPs that resort to CGNAT before they have an IPv6 rollout underway.
by ianlevesque 14y ago
This is unfortunately going to be just the first of many consumer ISPs that resort to CGNAT before they have an IPv6 rollout underway.
- wmf 14y agoVerizon is doing IPv6; hopefully they'll turn on IPv6 at the same time as CGN.
- trotsky 14y agoI wouldn't count on it - it seems they plan on a rather limited trial on fios where they control 100% of the CPE. They only started shipping the router they've qualified for it late last year, and even so they are pushing a lot of firmware updates to it. Not that it would be of much help to folks stuck with private space in the near term - it's not like their gaming or file sharing peers will be on routable 6. Except for some VOIP providers the big traffic sinks with 6 enabled are just bog standard http. If this isn't just sabre rattling it's pretty stupid that heavy hitters like verizon are SOL while so many old school /8's sit around 99% unreachable. Somebody needs to cut the shit and start the auctions.
- Sami_Lehtinen 14y agoThis is exactly what I was thinking about. IPv4 with NAT and full IPv6 connectivity. Btw. Does carrier grade NAT support UPnP?
- ianlevesque 14y agoUPnP doesn't leave your local network, so no. You cannot forward ports at all behind CGNAT.
- Sami_Lehtinen 14y agoWell, in case of CGNAT is run (naturally) by the ISP, and network connection from that point is bridged. So yes, I think UPnP will reach their system. If they just want to honor it. Maybe with very restricted port number ranges / portscustomer IP or so. If they have smart mapping system, they can map customers even to multiple IP's so that everyone really needing to open specified port can actually do, because I'm sure they'll NAT to range of public IPs.
- trotsky 14y agoYou misunderstand CGN deployments - there are still different address spaces on either side of the customer router. It's just now both of them are private/non routable prefixes, or in some cases the telco side is done using six. There's no briding and UPNP will never work - once you are on CGN data paths have to be set up from the customer side.
- MichaelApproved 14y agoAre there any good alternatives to this?
- wmf 14y agoThe correct solution is IPv6 + Dual Stack Lite, but it's probably not mature enough for deployment yet.
- pixl97 14y agohttp://www22.verizon.com/Support/Residential/Internet/HighSpeed/General+Support/Top+Questions/QuestionsOne/ATLAS8742.htm http://www22.verizon.com/Support/Residential/Internet/HighSp... Verizon shows some IPv6 support over FIOS. In the quick search I performed I didn't see any info about DSL. I've been hounding Suddenlink about their IPv6 support for some time. The response I received from one of the techs was that they were having issues with Cisco on the headend equipment.
- rwg 14y agoThis agrees with what I've read about Comcast's IPv6 deployment to cable modem customers — they're rolling it out quickly in markets served by Arris CMTSes and not at all in markets served by Cisco CMTSes, citing problems with the Cisco gear. If IPv6 really is undeployable on the uBR line with the current IOS releases, that's one hell of a black eye for Cisco.