In reply to a post by Spud2003:

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

Nothing to do with a shortage of public addresses at all but given they were deploying dual-stack for the CPE it made sense to supply to customers too as part of the same project and be done with it.

You are tying IPv6 rollout for devices to rollout for Internet customers, for which they had no definite plans at the start. According to the doc the devices were being dealt with in 2006/2007 - press reports suggest Comcast IPv6 rollout for Internet users was started around 2012. That suggests that the link between the two, while there, is not strong(five years difference). It would probably have been easier to be lazy and just leave Internet users with IPv4 connectivity alone especially since Comcast are considered one of the worst companies in America for customer satisfaction, which is my point.

Rolling out IPv6 to CPE in 2006/7, when Comcast had no support for IPv6 in its CMTS, as they were DOCSIS 1.1/2.0 and IPv6 over DOCSIS 2 was 5-6 years away, not to mention that none of their vendors supported it, would've been impressive indeed.

Comcast began IPv6 trials to both CPE and end users via 6RD then dual-stack in 2010. They were waiting on CMTS software, which was delivered by Arris and Cisco in 2010 and Motorola in 2011.

The deployments were if not precisely pretty much simultaneous.

terrible attitude for an isp, even BT are going to introduce it and they are a mass market isp.

If you dont like the policy I can only suggest walk with your money away from zen, if they are saying they will only introduce it when they see a financial reason to, then the only motivation for them is people to leave.

Edited by Chrysalis (Tue 03-Jun-14 16:49:47)

cat and mouse situation, no big site is going to go ipv6 only until broadband isps first mass rollout the protocol.

Although it wouldnt surprise me if google were to do it one day to "force" things along if they get frustrated, but even they arent immune to cutting of masses of users to make a point.

Totally agree, and I think it will go along the lines of 24 months notice.

I Agree that there is no drive that would force the use of IPV6.
I work for a large hosting provider and we have no more then a very basic plan and no time scales for IPV6.

I am in two minds about Zen doing this though, we are with them and are happy to pay more for the quality of service we get. We expect more from them then lesser ISP's.
I would not want them to rush the deployment of IPV6 or prioritise it over more pressing updates I would be though disappointed if they did not at least have it on there roadmap and have some sensible time scale.

More and more if there core networking kit will be IPV6 compatible as the old stuff goes EOL assuming they are replacing EOL kit (some times its cheaper to do so some times you are happy to risk it!). so they should have less and less excuses for not implementing it.

The argument that we must have IPV6 as we are running out of IPV4 does not hold a lot of water though as we would all want an IPV4 address too else we would end up behind a proxy or nat/pat pool for connections to IPV4 address.


Maybe an intermediary steep would be for Zen to provide an IPV6 endpoint / broker service for those that want it.

dual stacking is the intermediate step.

for what its worth I think website owners should be dual stacking also, a few I work for arent interested. But we wont be seeing any large scale ipv6 only sites with current state of affairs.

If you've got Flash you can see what percentage of Google visitors (ie people doing web searches) came to them over IPv6 here

http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

and there's also a tab showing the deployment rate in different countries, the UK is very low compared to the US, because we have no major ISPs (sorry A&A, your service is great and I'd glad of it, but you're no TalkTalk) offering IPv6 in this country. So most IPv6 users in the UK will be on university networks I'd guess since JANET - unlike the home ISPs and most businesses - rolled out IPv6 years ago on its core networks.

So, with 3.5% global penetration, and nearly every last one of that 3.5% being dual stack, there is no reason for anyone to have an IPv6-only site today. For a large company like Google or Facebook it makes sense to have a IPv6 version of your site (and they do) because you have dozens of servers, so even 1% of users are worth separating out. But if you run a web site about your local gardening society, why would you lift a finger to enable IPv6? And in some cases it is just a matter of lifting a finger, if you've hosted sites with Dreamhost for example IPv6 is free, but you've got to click one button per web site to enable it.

No UK ISP will ever face the problem Comcast ran into, we're too small a country. So the impetus for ISPs to enable dual stack will most likely have to come from Ofcom, or else we'll just have to wait until things completely fall apart and they've no choice. In the latter case expect to see CGNAT rolled out in a big way first because it's "what customers demand" (aka the cheapest somewhat working option).

Edited by deleted (Wed 04-Jun-14 17:26:48)

Where exactly did they say this?

Try here

In reply to a post by techguy:

Where exactly did they say this?

Nowhere.

In context; I said in the near-term we wouldn't be introducing IPv6 on our Broadband services. I also said the demand isn't there not that there was no demand. They are very different statements; the statement I made was about a lack of sufficient demand. Perhaps I could have been clearer, but in the context I expected readers to understand I was talking volume, not an absolute. The question itself implied demand, so to say there was none would be blatantly false. It's also not the only time the question has been asked, so clearly there is some demand. Demand, in the context I answered, i.e.near-term would be a big factor in any decision, as the situation otherwise doesn't justify a high priority right now.

That picture will change (with need/adoption becoming more important than pure customer demand in the future), and we regularly revisit the subject and priority based on the current and predicted situation to ensure we're ready in time. When we have concrete news we'll let you know - but that isn't now.

We also continue to make decisions on our network and systems development based on the future need for IPv6 (we also peer with other providers via IPv6), so it's not a case of doing nothing about it.

kind regards,
Phil