|
|
|
I'm on Aquiss. Today when I try to access bbc.co.uk/news I'm redirected to the international site, bbc.com/news
Has anyone else seen this - e.g. is it a ploy by BBC to force UK users to register and sign in?
On my mobile, if I switch off wifi and move onto Lebara, I'm seeing the same. Hence I don't think it's an issue with Aquiss address space only.
BBC News bugs me every day or so to register, but I keep clicking "maybe later". Ditto for their cookie prompts, which come every week or so. I don't see why they need to track me as an individual.
|
|
|
I just tried now from bbc.co.uk and it keeps to the same domain. Via EE connection.
Edit: not signed in.
Edited by Pheasant (Thu 24-Oct-24 15:52:44)
|
|
|
Also on Aquiss. bbc.co,uk/news renders true on mobile phone - ipv4 and renders as www.bbc.co.uk/news on desktop - ipv6 & ipv4.
|
|
Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.
|
|
|
|
Fine here from my ISP, also have Lebara on mobile phone and that is also working with no redirect.
Maybe clear all your cache and also cookies from the BBC in case they've left a marker having thought you were not in the UK, or sent you a permanent redirect to the com version.
|
|
|
|
Who are you using for DNS?
|
|
|
|
It's back to normal now. Maybe a BBC glitch.
(I don't think it was cookies as my laptop and phone are basically unrelated)
Thanks for the replies.
|
|
|
|
i have seen this as well (not today) and i can't remember if this was on 3 or aquiss .......
|
|
|
I would guess that BBC think that the IP you are coming from is not in UK.
OPNSense on Topton N100 - SWISH Fibre 900
NextDNS (subscription) - Unifi for Wifi
My Broadband Ping |
|
|
I would guess that BBC think that the IP you are coming from is not in UK.
This happens to me, as my company internal network has its internet connection in mainland europe, so bbc.com instead of .co.uk filled with adverts and cookies as the commerical part of the BBC is permitted to do.
If your ISP has recently purchased a block of IPv4 addresses previously used elsewhere in the world, the BBC may not have been told.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
you should only see bbc.com if they think you're outside the UK so maybe the IP block you're on was non-UK before?
|
|
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
|
|
|
you should only see bbc.com if they think you're outside the UK so maybe the IP block you're on was non-UK before?
I'm on a static IP from Aquiss.
It was working fine for months, then for a few hours one day I was being redirected to bbc.com, and then it was back to normal.
I think that there must have been a glitch with the geo-location database used by BBC.
|
|
|
you should only see bbc.com if they think you're outside the UK so maybe the IP block you're on was non-UK before?
I'm on a static IP from Aquiss.
It was working fine for months, then for a few hours one day I was being redirected to bbc.com, and then it was back to normal.
I think that there must have been a glitch with the geo-location database used by BBC.
It's possible. I've not come across this issue but have lots of other fun with sites like Reddit that use very very bad firewall rules
seb
|
|
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
|
|
|
you should only see bbc.com if they think you're outside the UK so maybe the IP block you're on was non-UK before?
I'm on a static IP from Aquiss.
It was working fine for months, then for a few hours one day I was being redirected to bbc.com, and then it was back to normal.
I think that there must have been a glitch with the geo-location database used by BBC.
I forgot to ask, did that happen over ipv6 or v4?
|
|
|
I forgot to ask, did that happen over ipv6 or v4?
You may not know. Useful to get an idea if it did.. but you won't be sure usually.
|
|
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
|
|
|
|
True, and its not normally something you'd instantly look at..
|
|
|
I forgot to ask, did that happen over ipv6 or v4?
I have v4+v6 enabled, but www.bbc.co.uk only supports IPv4 (i.e. A record, no AAAA record)
Aside: "bbc.co.uk" has both. But when you connect to it, it does nothing more than issue a redirect to "www.bbc.co.uk". Even from outside the UK.
|
|
|
I have v4+v6 enabled, but www.bbc.co.uk only supports IPv4 (i.e. A record, no AAAA record)
Aside: "bbc.co.uk" has both. But when you connect to it, it does nothing more than issue a redirect to "www.bbc.co.uk". Even from outside the UK.
bbc.co.uk is really where the MX records sit, and the BBC use messagelabs over v4 and v6.
www.bbc.co.uk and www.bbc.com map to the same IPv4 at fastly, and no IPv6 at all.
I assume BBC are using the CDN https://www.fastly.com/products/cdn
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
I have v4+v6 enabled, but www.bbc.co.uk only supports IPv4 (i.e. A record, no AAAA record)
Aside: "bbc.co.uk" has both. But when you connect to it, it does nothing more than issue a redirect to "www.bbc.co.uk". Even from outside the UK.
bbc.co.uk is really where the MX records sit, and the BBC use messagelabs over v4 and v6.
Sending E-mail to [email protected] is different to viewing the website, which was what this thread was about.
messagelabs is a widely-used spam filtering service. However, you'll notice that the MX records point to cluster1.eu.messagelabs.com and cluster1a.eu.messagelabs.com, both of which are IPv4 only (i.e. A record but no AAAA record).
www.bbc.co.uk and www.bbc.com map to the same IPv4 at fastly, and no IPv6 at all.
It depends where you're looking from.
For me in the UK, both those names are CNAMEs which resolve to gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. and that returns addresses 212.58.235/236/237.x which are within the BBC's own address space and announced out of the BBC's own autonomous system (AS2818).
| Text | 1
23
45
67
89
| ;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.bbc.co.uk. 12454 IN CNAME www.bbc.co.uk.pri.bbc.co.uk.www.bbc.co.uk.pri.bbc.co.uk. 19 IN CNAME gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk.
gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. 78 IN A 212.58.237.1gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. 78 IN A 212.58.236.129
gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. 78 IN A 212.58.235.129gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. 78 IN A 212.58.236.1
gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. 78 IN A 212.58.237.129gtm-live.pri.bbc.co.uk. 78 IN A 212.58.235.1 |
I don't see any third-party CDN.
However, from the USA I see fastly:
| Text | 1
23
4 | ;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.bbc.co.uk. 9860 IN CNAME www.bbc.co.uk.pri.bbc.co.uk.www.bbc.co.uk.pri.bbc.co.uk. 299 IN CNAME bbc.map.fastly.net.
bbc.map.fastly.net. 59 IN A 199.232.144.81 |
They are clearly doing some geo-based DNS. The first name "www.bbc.co.uk.pri.bbc.co.uk." is being resolved to a different second CNAME which depends on where you're querying from.
But you're correct in saying there's no IPv6 anywhere; not even for bbc.map.fastly.net. (whereas I'm sure fastly does provide IPv6)
This shows that BBC have chosen to turn off IPv6 support, even where it would be just a mouse-click to enable it. Presumably they have user tracking code that only works with IPv4. Or they just hate IPv6.
|
|
|
Ugh.. thanks for highlighting, my IPv6 testing is from a server that I realise is in France. 😂 My only choice for high speed internet is IPv4 only.
I saw an interesting article in the last week that realised IPv6 “may not be needed” given things like NAT and CGNAT have happened to keep v4 working. Its a depressing thought.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
Edited by jchamier (Sat 09-Nov-24 20:38:22)
|
|
|
The "internet of things" and self-driving cars will need IPv6.
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
|
The "internet of things" exists already and has done for years, and it works fine over IPv4.
IoT devices talk to a "meet in the middle" server, not directly to the end user, for multiple reasons:
1. To allow communication between devices which are behind a firewall. Even IPv6 home networks generally have an "allow-outbound-only" policy on the firewall
2. Because devices tend to change their addresses (especially on IPv6)
3. So that they can manage your devices 24x7, when the user is not online
4. So that they have full control of the user experience (and collect lots of valuable data that they can sell on)
The fact that it also enables NAT is a bonus, but not the fundamental reason why they use this architecture.
|
|
|
The "internet of things" and self-driving cars will need IPv6.
Nope, and nope.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
I saw an interesting article in the last week that realised IPv6 “may not be needed” given things like NAT and CGNAT have happened to keep v4 working.
That depends on how "need" is defined. The internet was never going to stop working if IPv6 wasn't universal, but IPv4 address exhaustion undoubtedly causes problems.
Oliver.
|
|
|
That depends on how "need" is defined. The internet was never going to stop working if IPv6 wasn't universal, but IPv4 address exhaustion undoubtedly causes problems.
The question, and balance, is if the "problems" of working round exhausted v4 is less work than the confusion v6 causes for many people. I long said that we needed a mid-ground, as the un-memorable IPv6 addresses is a problem themselves.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
I long said that we needed a mid-ground, as the un-memorable IPv6 addresses is a problem themselves. Only for geeks like us. At least 95% of the world population haven't a clue what IPv4 and IP6 are, and never will. Most people I know don't even know what the acronym URL means or what it does. They just know the published "word(+ number)" address for websites they might visit.
Re the IoT and self-driving cars:
Yes the first has existed for quite a while now. But we can expect a hyperbolic increase in the number of "things" over the next decade. As for self-driving car similar applies, bearing in mind they are fast moving and need far better internet links than we now have.
I expect you are well aware of sat-nav and dash-cam speed indicators lagging several seconds behind actual. GPS is of course not going to be the answer, but whatever the answer is we don't yet know. Several interesting links are given here.
5G or higher becomes essential, and "masts" will need to be every few metres.
Then add in delivery drones above and landing amongst us, and maybe flying taxis.
Is IPv4 plus CGNAT going to handle that lot?
+++++++++
Street power failures will be fun. There's a 39-second video in one of those links. See where the driver's hands are. Think of the drivers' reaction times if the cars in the area suddenly revert to our current self-driving tech.
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
I saw an interesting article in the last week that realised IPv6 “may not be needed” given things like NAT and CGNAT have happened to keep v4 working.
That depends on how "need" is defined. The internet was never going to stop working if IPv6 wasn't universal, but IPv4 address exhaustion undoubtedly causes problems.
Exactly. How will IPv4 plus CGNAT work once the number of servers + net routers + websites approaches 4,294,967,296.
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
Re the IoT and self-driving cars
…
I was behind this Ford Mustang from Wayve waiting at the lights this afternoon. Didn’t clock at first it was on a training mission in East London 😂
Hope this bet pays off for Masayoshi Son!
|
|
|
Exactly. How will IPv4 plus CGNAT work once the number of servers + net routers + websites approaches 4,294,967,296.
I'd happily share an IPv4 address, my IP address needs are fully satisfied by IPv6 now. I don't think the SR203 is on Sky's roadmap to be enrolled in MAP-T though.
Oliver.
|
|
|
I don’t see the need for self driving cars to have internet access. They may need to have self organising network between them on a stretch of road
Remember the people whom said we needed IPv6 mostly made up the use cases before these other things were designed.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
Now you are being fanciful.
No internet connecting them. Bluetooth impossible in most circumstances at junctions. Similarly radar. A completely new method of communication required.
I doubt if AI will give us multi-vehicle telepathy.
Mind you, Musk might give us human telepathy for the masses, not as present for the few.
Quantum entanglement to avoid crash entanglement?
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
Edited by pluralist (Mon 11-Nov-24 00:05:41)
|
|
|
No internet connecting them. Bluetooth impossible in most circumstances at junctions. Similarly radar. A completely new method of communication required.
Yep, maybe copy how humans work; "computer vision" using cameras, augmented by radar and lidar. Have a look at Waymo in California.
Quantum entanglement to avoid crash entanglement?
Hmm!
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
I expect you are well aware of sat-nav and dash-cam speed indicators lagging several seconds behind actual. GPS is of course not going to be the answer, but whatever the answer is we don't yet know.
Erm, use the car's existing speedometer, which measures the rotational speed of the wheels? It has worked well for about a century.
I don't buy the argument that self-driving cars will need high-bandwidth, millisecond-latency Internet connections. To be safe, a car needs to function autonomously - i.e. it does not need to be continuously controlled from some remote authority. There's never going to be 100% coverage of 5G, and even if there were, it would never be 100% free of outages.
Certainly a central authority could give high-level instructions, like which route to take, but that does not require continuous connectivity and it's not high-bandwidth.
|
|
|
Are you aware that all, or almost all, cars manufactured in the EU have speedometers that over-read by about 3mph except when the car is at rest?
This is why I normally set my cruise control 3mph high. Brilliant for passing cars on motorway-standard roads when variable speed limits are in force. Perhaps even better if I retain my current car when new ones start having automatic speed limit recognition. (All the ones I read the specs of seem to have that switchable, but that option may not survive).
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
|
My current car is about the closest of any I have owned - reads about 1mph over compared with sat nav speed calculations. Compared to street signs where they flash up the speed it is between 1mph and 3mph but as there are differences I don't think they are all correctly calibrated either.
I have had a car in the past that over read by about 5mph - that is a fairly chunky difference.
|
|
|
Are you aware that all, or almost all, cars manufactured in the EU have speedometers that over-read by about 3mph except when the car is at rest?
This is why I normally set my cruise control 3mph high. Brilliant for passing cars on motorway-standard roads when variable speed limits are in force. Perhaps even better if I retain my current car when new ones start having automatic speed limit recognition. (All the ones I read the specs of seem to have that switchable, but that option may not survive).
Although my car has sat-nav the routes it gives often take the long way round so I use the Waze app on my mobile for navigation. This has a GPS speed readout on the screen. Setting the cruise control to 75 mph on dual carriageway roads means the car gives me the nag message but the GPS bounces about between 70 and 71 mph.On my routine journeys I regularly pass a number of speed cameras on 60mph and 70mph roads with the cruise control set to 65mph or 75mph and have not been pinged yet (touch wood).
Checking against the roadside screens which read your speed in 20mph and 30mph areas the GPS speed normally matches exactly the roadside display while the speedometer is over-reading by about 10%. I am making the assumption that there is a similar discrepancy throughout the speed range.
|
|
|
Are you aware that all, or almost all, cars manufactured in the EU have speedometers that over-read by about 3mph except when the car is at rest? Allows for tyre wear and slightly different sized tyres by manufacturer. Not a surprise, I believe the construction and use regs go back a very long way on that (so likely predate EU/EEC)
Separately cars since 2016 have had speed recognition and alerts, and in 2020 or so you couldn’t disable except each time you start car the visual alert. What is due imminently (maybe March 25?) is the car taking action if you speed.
The alerts and reading road signs or looking at Sat Nav OFTEN get it wrong; there’s a stretch of the M4 where a side road causes cars on the 70mph motorway to be told they are speeding all the time. 😂
Wider than EU I read - its apparently all European countries working together for driver safety; I guess some of these may be invented by EU commission.
None of this needs communications or IPv6.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
The (UK) 3mph over-read is a direct result of various UN/EU et al rules, (Laws/Regulations/Directives), now existing in most or all countries. The primary reason is "road safety" to ensure that vehicles are never travelling faster than the indicated speed.
Prior to those, which ere apparently being initiated after WWII, in the UK they were allowed to indicate true speed plus or minus 2mph.
Basically the reason we now fall in with the rest of the world is just an adjustment of our early requirement to be inline with the reason in my first paragraph. Currently legislated for by the EU and incorporated into UK law as a result of our time as an EU member.
The speedo mechanism fitted to any vehicle has to be calibrated appropriately for each optional factory-fitted wheel and tyre size. A JIT assembly nightmare  .
I never suggested it was anything to do with self-driving cars. The long-established forward movement in traffic and lane change alerts are also nothing to do with "self-driving", merely driver and safety aids.
You keep talking about these as though they a full self-driving feature. Obviously they will be incorporated, but a very elementary tool compared to what is needed overall.
As for traffic lights and roundabouts, I can take you to some real horrors in South Manchester where it is very easy to see/look at the wrong set of lights in front of you and also confuse drivers behind you in the lanes either side because although you follow a legitimate route and even indicate at the earliest possible time they don't expect you to turn where you do.
A self-driving car could be confused in the same circumstances.
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
I think the most recent regulations are in The Motor Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 1996
Section 19 reads:
1. The vehicle shall be fitted with a speedometer capable of indicating speed in mph at all speeds mph. up the maximum design speed of the vehicle.
2. For all true speeds up to the maximum design speed of the vehicle, the true speed shall not exceed the indicated speed.
3. For all true speeds of between 25 mph and 70 mph (or the maximum design speed if lower), the difference between the indicated speed and the true speed shall not exceed V / 10 + 6.25mph where V = the true speed of the vehicle in mph.
So the speedometer must not under-read but may over-read by 10% + 6.25 so the speedometer would be legally compliant if it showed 83.25mph when the true speed was 70mph. Presumably the 6.25 parameter is a conversion from 10 kph.
Edited by GonePostal (Tue 12-Nov-24 01:51:25)
|
|
|
The alerts and reading road signs or looking at Sat Nav OFTEN get it wrong; there’s a stretch of the M4 where a side road causes cars on the 70mph motorway to be told they are speeding all the time Yes, they do. I have had it on 2 cars from different manufacturers. Both get the speed wrong, sometimes reading signs that are not relevant, sometimes missing speed changes on variable speed limit motorways, sometimes not updating that you have gone from a single carriageway to a dual carriageway (and not consistently even on the same bit of road at different times), etc.
Mine is set just to update so that I can set the speed of the speed limiter to match - but I do it manually. It has an option to do it automatically but it gets it wrong too often. Once they change it to default to automatic adjustment there will be a lot of people suddenly losing power or accelerating due to the camera picking up an incorrect speed.
The other issue I believe is that things like changes from single to dual carriageway use the sat nav data. I don't use the car sat nav and to update maps is an annual subscription - I don't pay the subscription so my maps will gradually get more and more out of date meaning they won't provide the additional information to the automatic speed limit recognition meaning that as roads change it won't necessarily have all the information to get the speed right.
|
|
|
- I don't pay the subscription so my maps will gradually get more and more out of date meaning they won't provide the additional information to the automatic speed limit recognition meaning that as roads change it won't necessarily have all the information to get the speed right.
Same... I use third party (better) sat nav solutions, with the likes of Android Auto/Apple CarPlay these are more common. I guess this is a case of FBD (Flawed By Design).
don't other EU countries have a national database of speed limits, centrally held, but in the UK local councils can change a limit by installing signs and don't need to notify anyone? Makes it hard for any technology solution to assist.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
|
|
"Makes it hard for any technology solution to assist"
The word that jumps out is 'assist'.
Ulimately down to the driver to be observant. We never relied on technology years ago.
Was Eclipse Home Option 1, VM 2Mb & O2 Standard
Utility Warehouse (up to 16mbps) via Talk Talk, upgraded to fibre 40/10
|
|
|
The word that jumps out is 'assist'. But if it legally is required to be turned on by default and requires a manual override which, if used, could mean additional liability if there is an accident then it doesn't exactly help. This tech is required to be installed and enabled on all new cars and yet it is quite flakey and as far as I know relies on a service that is in most cases subscription based (map updates for sat nav). For a mandated safety service it shouldn't require a non-mandated sat nav solution.
|
|
|
I think this thread has gone too far off topic.
Edited by Realalemadrid (Wed 13-Nov-24 15:35:23)
|
|
|
|
There was a thread on a Hyundai forum last April (some Hyundai models have a broken ISLA system that works by trying to read roadside signs, doesn't use a satnav database, but doesn't recognise the UK national speed limit sign, I guess because it can't tell whether the limit should be 60 or 70).
One guy on there managed to get an answer from his MP quoting the then Minister for Roads that GSR technologies (including ISLA) are currently optional in the mainland UK (but mandatory in NI under the Windsor framework). They are mandated only in the EU since July. I don't think this has changed since.
|
|
|
|
I see it has been suggested we are off topic...
However, my understanding was that any new cars in the UK would have it turned on by default whenever you start the engine. Whilst not mandated it is what the cars will actually do... I may be misremembering though.
|
|
|
I think this thread has gone too far off topic. Sorry. Google Maps on my laptop doesn't track this site.
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
I guess your satnav has also gone wrong.
|
|
|
The one in my car needs a £300 CD from Germany to update the maps and direction instructions. My old phone holder sucked onto the windscreen works just fine.
We know that the organized workers of the country are our friends. As for the rest, they don’t matter a tinker’s cuss - Manny Shinwell
Connections: Pixel 9 on Three 4+ (LTE)/5G, Pixel 6a on EE in reserve. At home Three Mobile, with (Three)ZTE MC888 router giving 5G on a good day.
|
|
|
Ulimately down to the driver to be observant. We never relied on technology years ago. Flashing and beeping car incorrect speed indicators could be cited as a driver distraction. The law says you must not drive distracted. I can't square this circle.
24 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
|
Pages in this thread: 
Print Thread
