IPv6: Why direct end to end connectivity matters

PretoriaWISP said:
A NOC engineer being born here... hey @PBCool it is interesting read though. Reminds me of the guy that helped me build my network, sadly passed away had the same tenacity such as @Gimli_ dare I mention cost? I wish ipv6 was maybe a bit less in cost then I don't see why PBCool wouldn't go for it. In the end guys its cost, ISP's have tons of cost to worry about though it makes sense to go ipv6 money dictates or plays a role in deciding what direction they move in. Worth a discussion whenever I get to have the chance to meet one of the founders of Cool Ideas... if my emails don't get placed into the spam folder.
Click to expand...
Not really a cost thing, there is another layer of management associated with the static PD. But other than that its not a major thing, is why we turn it up gradually.
 
Packet-Kollector said:
What cost? Other than up skilling/extra headache of management, what cost?
Click to expand...
Well that would be for a ISP to tell you, I am not that, I rely on an ISP to provision so ultimately what they decide I must work at following. Though management has a cost to it no? There is always a cost somewhere.
PBCool said:
Not really a cost thing, there is another layer of management associated with the static PD. But other than that its not a major thing, is why we turn it up gradually.
Click to expand...
Huh well that's pretty fair I mean you have the resources on hand so yes I'd agree, I stand corrected. But you guys already handout ipv6 with your ipv4. Argument here is why not static ipv6 from get go? Apologies I am just trying to understand the argument a bit more here I tend to agree that we like ipv4 but doesn't it come back to what we were talking about in the other post a few weeks back?
 
From an end-user perspective here.
Do I care about IPv6... not one bit.
What do I care about? Poor speeds, high latency and downtime.

I've had internet with various ISPs for decades, but the one thing that remains is the pretentiousness. As if providing internet to the man in the street is an uber state secret. We're not allowed to know what is going on behind the scenes, we're not allowed to know where our monthly sub is going. We're especially not allowed to know what the real reasons are for throttling international traffic, and the colloquially named "Netflix hours".

As is the custom in this country, the general assumption is the end user is a dumbass and won't know any better. Unfortunately that is not true and most ISPs stick to that approach.

In that regard, my current ISP tells me my router is the problem. So we replaced the router with another one on a temporary basis, then they swung the IPv6 bat at me. They really think I have ID-10-T tattooed on my forehead.

You can tell them until you're blue in the face "local traffic is fine, it's traffic to international destinations that's slow as lard". Nope... "It's your router, sir". I would love to know how my router can tell which sites route over that undersea cable and then selectively throttle my traffic, as if it as a mind of its own. As a matter of fact I tried to do this intentionally once, it did not end well, in fact it did NOTHING.

Leads me to the same conclusion every time. ISPs are in the same class as lawyers, estate agents and car dealerships
 
EmmanuelGoldstein said:
From an end-user perspective here.
Do I care about IPv6... not one bit.
What do I care about? Poor speeds, high latency and downtime.

I've had internet with various ISPs for decades, but the one thing that remains is the pretentiousness. As if providing internet to the man in the street is an uber state secret. We're not allowed to know what is going on behind the scenes, we're not allowed to know where our monthly sub is going. We're especially not allowed to know what the real reasons are for throttling international traffic, and the colloquially named "Netflix hours".

As is the custom in this country, the general assumption is the end user is a dumbass and won't know any better. Unfortunately that is not true and most ISPs stick to that approach.

In that regard, my current ISP tells me my router is the problem. So we replaced the router with another one on a temporary basis, then they swung the IPv6 bat at me. They really think I have ID-10-T tattooed on my forehead.

You can tell them until you're blue in the face "local traffic is fine, it's traffic to international destinations that's slow as lard". Nope... "It's your router, sir". I would love to know how my router can tell which sites route over that undersea cable and then selectively throttle my traffic, as if it as a mind of its own. As a matter of fact I tried to do this intentionally once, it did not end well, in fact it did NOTHING.

Leads me to the same conclusion every time. ISPs are in the same class as lawyers, estate agents and car dealerships
Click to expand...
Well I believe I did mention this before, most of the time its slight packet loss that creates this belief of international throttling. But still up to your ISP to mitigate or assist in resolving.
 
PBCool said:
Well I believe I did mention this before, most of the time its slight packet loss that creates this belief of international throttling. But still up to your ISP to mitigate or assist in resolving.
Click to expand...
No assistance was forthcoming, so I'm setting up a whole blog about the saga, naming and shaming works, sometimes.
 
Gimli_ said:
Some of the software protocols developed to get around NAT:
- UPnP (Universal Plug and Play / WANIPConnection)
- NAT-PMP (NAT Port Mapping Protocol)
- PCP (Port Control Protocol)
- STUN (Session Traversal Utilities for NAT)
- TURN (Traversal Using Relays around NAT)
- ICE (Interactive Connectivity Establishment)
- UDP / TCP Hole Punching
- IoT Cloud Relays & MQTT Brokers
- HTTP Reverse Tunnels (e.g., Cloudflare Tunnels, ngrok, LocalXpose)
- Reverse SSH Tunnels
- STUN-based Mesh VPNs (Tailscale, ZeroTier, Netbird)
- Dynamic DNS (DynDNS, No-IP, Cloudflare API DDNS)
- Application Layer Gateways (ALG)
Click to expand...
Every single one a security nightmare that should see the miscreant caught configuring them burnt at the stake
 
PretoriaWISP said:
Well that would be for a ISP to tell you, I am not that, I rely on an ISP to provision so ultimately what they decide I must work at following. Though management has a cost to it no? There is always a cost somewhere.

Huh well that's pretty fair I mean you have the resources on hand so yes I'd agree, I stand corrected. But you guys already handout ipv6 with your ipv4. Argument here is why not static ipv6 from get go? Apologies I am just trying to understand the argument a bit more here I tend to agree that we like ipv4 but doesn't it come back to what we were talking about in the other post a few weeks back?
Click to expand...
Again its something you need to build into the systems and manage. Basically we need to auto deploy fixed blocks to the whole subscriber base.
 
EmmanuelGoldstein said:
Been burnt with STUN... they got into my network via that a few years ago.
Click to expand...
While I agree that 99.99% of users have no clue about IPv6 or even IPv4, a lot more people do know about these hideous protocols like STUN. I think the biggest one I used to hear about often back in the day was people messing around with their routers to enable the notoriously insecure UPnP to make their PlayStation games play nicely online. I think the big issue was that there are many different UPnP implementations across vendors' routers, some of which are crazy insecure and outdated.
 
Moosedrool said:
Almost 2 decades and the ipv6 debate is still upon us.
Click to expand...
It is happening worldwide, just not here. And it will be another 2 decades before all IPV4 is gone (hopefully)

With France, Germany and India being about 75-80%. America and UK 50-55% and so on, I don't see anyone turning back. We are beyond the point of no return. Only here we are stragglers with 3.5%
 
EmmanuelGoldstein said:
WebSquad + OctoFail
Click to expand...
Alas yes, and my ISP telling me that "IPv6 will solve your slow internet problems"
Click to expand...
We have? Drop me a ticket ref please. We do encourage use of IPv6, and it can certainly help with NAT related issues. It may have been recommended as part of the diagnosis problem for a specific issue, but I don't think the team would recommend it as a solution to speed issues. Speed issues are line issues.
 
PBCool said:
Look I totally agree with having those locally addressable. But again I don't believe there are thousands of people suffering in silence around it.

Most people would interface them with something like home assistant and so a pu lic v4 IP works fine.
Click to expand...
I interface with home assistant, but you still need a account with nabu casa to access your home assistant, or a static IPV4 with a vpn to access your home assistant, or a public IPv4 with a dyndns. Again, I am not trying to find workarounds to make IPv4 with NAT work. I am trying to be forward looking.
 
websquadza said:
We have? Drop me a ticket ref please. We do encourage use of IPv6, and it can certainly help with NAT related issues. It may have been recommended as part of the diagnosis problem for a specific issue, but I don't think the team would recommend it as a solution to speed issues. Speed issues are line issues.
Click to expand...
It matters not anymore. I have a workaround for the nonsense. It's called NordVPN.
 
EmmanuelGoldstein said:
It matters not anymore. I have a workaround for the nonsense. It's called NordVPN.
Click to expand...
So the NordVPN overlay network? That is still a work around because you don't have IPv6 with static PD. For that matter you could also use Tailscale or Netbird. IPv4 work arounds is not the issue raised in this post.
 
Gimli_ said:
So the NordVPN overlay network? That is still a work around because you don't have IPv6 with static PD. For that matter you could also use Tailscale or Netbird. IPv4 work arounds is not the issue raised in this post.
Click to expand...
I think the workaround is for performance specifically.
 
If South Africa isn't experiencing an IPv4 address shortage, what's the justification for putting customers behind CGNAT and charging extra for a static IP address?
 
Praeses said:
If South Africa isn't experiencing an IPv4 address shortage, what's the justification for putting customers behind CGNAT and charging extra for a static IP address?
Click to expand...
South Africa in *general* isn't as short as the rest of the world, the biggest players have far too much allocation. Middle players running out and then most of the smaller have been out for a while.

Almost all of our services are still running on public IP space. For a static it is a case of management associated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X