Yes, I know it's not just teens, esp as several Linux distros are shared by torrents, but it was in part for how limited the effects may turn out to be. Similarly, while for those who are deep into certain games, it would be a nuisance, I wonder what proportion of internet users (let alone PN customers, given the lack, before now, of 'unlimited' accounts) will be unduly affected.

Of course, as someone with a fixed IP, it's a little academic for me, for now (unless I move ISP, or want to go to IPv6 on my PN connection). Moving ISP is unlikely for now, though I detest the unwillingness of PN to reward loyalty of customers with similar discounts to those they offer new users. The half price fibre offer is one example. If fibre was already available in my area, I'd have been willing to get a new phone line, use PN for line rental, calls and fibre, but as an existing customer, they'd not do the same deal...

Thanks both, for the info.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

And logging will be fun, the next time the likes of Ben Dover start fingering an IP address, hundreds or thousands of people could be using it at any one time. I wonder if Plusnet have considered this scenario for the trial?

If you don't mind, I'd rather you didn't mention about Ben Dover fingering my IP address... That will teach me not to post my PlusNet phone number in a BT phone box!

I would like to see 2 regulations, to encourage both ipv6 deployment and good ipv4 management.

1 - No cg nat allowed unless a ipv6 service is available.
2 - No cg nat used on customers with only a single ipv4 unless no other customers have more than 1 ipv4.

I think cg nat is preffered because isp's see a better business case for it, business case ahead of whats needed for the internet. I forsee non natted dynamic ips becoming a premium product with this.

Edited by Chrysalis (Sun 20-Jan-13 12:22:40)

In reply to a post by Oldjim:

Possibly the fact that virtually none of the customer base have IP6 capable routers - then again that could be completely wrong

That's a bit like saying that people with old TVs are holding back HDTV programming. They're not, they just don't benefit from the new tech.

An ISP could role out IPv6 tomorrow and it would have no impact on IPv4 users.

It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation with customer IPv6 routers and ISPs rolling out IPv6 but ISPs aren't being "held back," as such.

In reply to a post by ultra:

I don't know the availability of IPv6 web sites at present.

Expanding rapidly.

See: http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2013/0...

Today, ten percent of the Alexa Top 1000 websites are now enabled with IPv6 and large access networks have enabled IPv6 for their end users, according to measurements we made for World IPv6 Launch.

Four of the five largest websites in the world � Google, Facebook, YouTube, Yahoo!, and Wikipedia � all serve IPv6 from their main websites today. In addition, content distribution networks like Limelight and Akamai are providing services to their customers to enable IPv6 hosted content, and hosting companies are making it possible for hosted websites to use IPv6 as well. The three largest web-hosting companies in Germany serve IPv6 for all their hosted websites.

Does Plusnet use Carrier Grade NAT now, like BT the parent does?

Only as a trial at present

Can you opt-out like you can with BT?

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Can you opt-out like you can with BT?

Unlike the BT trial, Plusnet's was "opt in" so no-one should be NAT-ed without their knowledge.