People seem to be happy with what they have got.

On Sunday, I went for a walk to a retail park for B&M and Food Warehouse, I do it a couple of times a month, anyway I walk down a couple of streets and I have a peak just to be nosey home many people have FTTP. While there are certainly more people that do have FTTP than there used to be, they don't seem to be rushing. Sure, I can't see all places due to them having high hedges, but there are still a lot that don't have a splice box on their houses, these are terraced houses, so would not be on the side and certainly not on the back of the house
Even when I walk to Lidls/Morrisons, I pass three different streets and go the opposite way on my street and still don't see a great amount of splice boxes.
I know i am sad, but it is something to do while walking

Next year, Hereford will become a stop sell area for FTTC, so people will have little choice, but as yet, it seems as if people are not bothered about FTTP.

I can see their point, if it works then why change.

what you will see, when an area has fttp, those who are out of contract will typically jump straight to fttp. Then you have to wait for those come to re-contracting and then you will see another chunk go over. Then you get the stragglers and refusniks

Its around 3 years since my street was FTTP enabled and all by one property has now got FTTP installed. Most signed up immediately and the rest within the first 2 years when their contracts expired.

You've made a lot of assumptions to get to a point where all these houses that don't have FTTP are therefore inhabited by people that agree with your opinions on upgrading, that you've posted multiple times before.

The lack of a splice point outside someone's house only means they aren't connected to an FTTP network, unless you're going to start knocking on doors you can't know the reasons why that might be. Some options could be:

• They are in contract with their current provider
• They are out of contract with their provider and missed the notification and are too busy to have checked
• Their existing provider offered them a re-contract price to keep the current service and they don't know enough about connectivity to ask to move to FTTP
• The only internet-connected device in the house is a smartphone
• They have a bundle deal with Virgin Media in an HFC area and keep renewing it
• Their landlord provides the internet service and they have no say in it

etc.

Yes, you are correct, that there could be a number of reasons, it is over two years since TFFP have been up and running around here, both Zzoomm and Openreach, so I would have thought a few more would have gone for FTTP in those two years.

I do chat to a fair few people online and what ever and the majority of them have no interest in updating to FTTP as they see no need.

Yes you are right, some people may use mobile to get them on the net, I have said this before., that not everyone requires a fixed broadband service and is one of the problems that pushing Freely onto people will have.

I should have, maybe put, maybe people are happy with what they have

No Virgin around here.

You may be right about landlords, but around here, they are either Herefordshire housing, so no internet supplied and while there are some private renting I expect, 2 houses up from me for a start, not sure if a landlord would supply broadband. I know the ones up the road from me had to ask their landlord if they could have Zzoomm installed. But yes, different landlords do different things.

I just thought with the amount of houses that more people would have had FTTP. As Taras posted, no doubt that will change, certainly once stop sell happens.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Nexfibre comes here next year, which i must admit, I did not see happening.

I thought two networks in this city was more than enough, and did not have a large enough population for three networks.

There will be a range of reasons why people will have or not have FTTP, from desperate to have it due to lousy connection (us), through perfectly happy with the speed they have (several people I know), to not using t'internet, (BiL).
For anyone wanting to retain 'landline' I would advise to hold off, several providers are having problems with porting numbers and/or getting DV working properly.

That feel when you know who started the thread by the topic on the home page.

The uptake figures for FTTP are pretty well known. It's discussed by BT in Openreach figures and can work out approximately how altnets are doing from those results too. Take up is in the 35-40% range. Virgin Media have a similar number on their cable network. Some altnets report that range in their mature builds too.

My home is terraced and served by a pole, as is my neighbours.

My FTTP was installed by openreach and has a splice box on the external wall at ground level.

My neighbour was installed by an Openreach contractor and they just fed the drop wire directly through the wall and so any splice is internal.

There was, a couple of years ago, installs where the fibre went directly in, and a connector was fitted straight on that (they were pants) but no splice required.

People have different reasons for not switching particularly tenants! Tenants are worried to be tied in a contract with an Altnet because in case they had to leave that home and the next home they are moving to does not supply the same Altnet they will have to continue paying bills for the old provider.

Openreach is a peace of mind for them as they can freely move knowing the provider is universally available everywhere.

Of-course that's not my headache as we are permanent residents. My reasons for not switching yet are different.

1. Concerns over CGNAT with Community Fibre that I don't have a problem with BT. I am still reviewing whether port forwarding will be an issue and that has been one of the hindrance for remaining on FTTC. I'm worried that certain games might not work online.

2. The Linksys Velop router that Community Fibre supplies only comes with 3 Ethernet LAN ports instead of 4. I'm testing my new TV satellite receiver that has WiFi built in as my old Technomate TM-5402 does not support WiFi but only LAN.

3. Hassle of joining and still trying to decide where we want to install the ONT because we are contemplating whether to install it in the living room or only in the room next to the main master bedroom. This will require re-arranging our LAN cables from living room to the rest of the computers should it be installed there.

With BT generally happy with the service but recently has dropped to 68Mbps from the 78-80Mbps and upload from 20Mbps to 17Mbps. So, while I have been happy for the most part of the last 3 years I'm a little less happy now since January BT Smart Hub 2 router firmware upgrade my speed has remained lower than ever before. Have not moaned about this as I know Community Fibre is here and soon Virgin Media Nexfibre and I can switch at any time without bothering to troubleshoot the existing FTTC service.

Nevertheless people do leave and switch to FTTP and neighbours usually hide their emotions and will only say "hello, nice to see you" but deep inside many people have problems that they don't share.

BT group has lost over 200 thousand customers https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2025/01/bt-gro... Openreach lost 377k broadband lines in their previous half year results (H1 FY25) to Sept 2024.
If the Altnets were simply rolling out but didn't have an impact on customer loss for Openreach, Openreach wouldn't have been trying to ramp up their FTTP build.

I noticed that there is one human psychology is when you don't have something yet, you badly want it! But the moment you get it you don't have the same urge to have it. This applies for FTTP as well. If you don't have it available in the first place you will want it more but when it becomes available the excitement diminishes.

Edited by BLaZiNgSPEED (Wed 09-Apr-25 03:46:03)

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

There was, a couple of years ago, installs where the fibre went directly in, and a connector was fitted straight on that (they were pants) but no splice required.

Before I started to look at fibre, that is what I thought happened. It was only when it started becoming a d things and I got interested in how it works, even if I was not interested in having it myself, that I found out about the splice box.
Not that Zzoomm splices their fibre, disappointed me really as I wanted to watch it being done, but they used a connector instead in the splice box.
It is a large splice box, compared to the ones openreach uses.

I did see a OR one that was black, I don't know if someone painted it black, but it is the only one I have seen that is black.

I don't like to see them low down. A terrace of house with boxes at low level - local yobs go past after a few beers and they could easily rip out every connection.

In reply to a post by jpm:

You've made a lot of assumptions to get to a point where all these houses that don't have FTTP are therefore inhabited by people that agree with your opinions on upgrading, that you've posted multiple times before.

The lack of a splice point outside someone's house only means they aren't connected to an FTTP network, unless you're going to start knocking on doors you can't know the reasons why that might be. Some options could be:

• They are in contract with their current provider
• They are out of contract with their provider and missed the notification and are too busy to have checked
• Their existing provider offered them a re-contract price to keep the current service and they don't know enough about connectivity to ask to move to FTTP
• The only internet-connected device in the house is a smartphone
• They have a bundle deal with Virgin Media in an HFC area and keep renewing it
• Their landlord provides the internet service and they have no say in it

etc.

Not an exhaustive list , and all these are all pretty much the same in that they assume a switch to an Alt Net is undoubtedly desirable but it’s practical considerations such as being in contract that are stopping people switching , so in addition to these reasons I’d also add,
Those perfectly happy with their existing service and provider and see no need to change ,
Those that don’t want the ‘hassle’ of a new installation with variable rates of disruption or don’t want multiple service attachments on their property
Those that are dismissive of companies that knock on your door to get sales , assuming (quite correctly in many cases ) they will tell lies about themselves and their competitors .
Those that don’t want to place their trust in ‘fly by night’ companies, with little or no track record , have no compensation scheme for failure , and are as likely to go bust or be taken over as still trading in a year or two , potentially leaving the consumer in a situation of having to arrange a replacement service .
Those that are aware of where the funding comes from for many of these Alt Nets and take a moral stance on that .
Those that appreciate that the ‘savings’ may not be realised, and the introductory price is not likely to be maintained for very long .
Those that don’t want to ‘reward’ companies that have ridden roughshod over a communities objections to that Alt Nets use of overhead service in a previously exclusively underground serviced area and consider that company has blighted the local environment

Edited by Iniltous (Wed 09-Apr-25 10:32:34)

There's also the awkward squad of those who, like me, don't consider CGNAT with no IPv6 to be "proper" internet

In reply to a post by MHC:

I don't like to see them low down. A terrace of house with boxes at low level - local yobs go past after a few beers and they could easily rip out every connection.

I live in a not sure what you call them, it is a block of five houses, but you have to go into the gate and down my steps to get to the splice box. I did think about upstairs to be honest, in fact I think it would have been a better idea, router up here and then one Ethernet cable going downstairs. But for some reason that did not happen.

If you are going to be worried about Yobs after a few beers, then you are going to be worried about everything you have outside in easy access. I am lucky, I live where we don't normally get yobs after a few beers, just me when I have had a few beers

I don't need to worry ... mine is well back and the CSP is internal!

Just is some older locations I see them and can see how easy it would be to wreck the connections for a whole street in just a few minutes.

You say about the funding comes from for many of these Alt Nets, but BT have not been British for years, even if they do have British in their name. Who are their shareholders?

Every large company have shareholders you may not like or agree with, I know the company I work for have shareholders I prefer them not to have.

Trust in fly-by-night companies, yes, I can certainly go with that, as I thought the same thing before i went for Zzoomm.
Who is this company, where did they come from, how long will they be around? My main problem was with the CEO, Matthew Hare. I read that he have started one company, Gigaclear, and then for some reason sold it and started up another one doing the same thing. Why did he do that, and why should I trust someone who did that?

But in the end I thought stick it, go for it and see what happens. Not sure what will happen now that Zzoomm have combined with Full fibre, but as I have got older, I thought, what will be, will be, and now I have hit 60, even more so.
The takeover, merger what ever they want to call it may be better, at least people will get a choice of providers.

In reply to a post by billford:

There's also the awkward squad of those who, like me, don't consider CGNAT with no IPv6 to be "proper" internet

Zzoomm thankfully don't use CGNAT and they have IPv6, but since IPv6 is a recent thing, I don't know how you can say that it is not proper internet without it. Plusnet did not use IPv6 and to be honest, it made no difference to me.
I use a VPN a lot of the times and that blocks IPv6 as well.
If I do a what is my IP address using the VPN, it don't come up with IPv6.


While I had no interest in going for fibre, I am happy with what I have got and have no plan to move providers while I am living here, even when Nexfibre comes here next year, if it happens.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

since IPv6 is a recent thing, I don't know how you can say that it is not proper internet without it.

I don't think he is saying that at all. He is saying that CGNAT is not proper internet unless IPv6 is available.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

I don't think he is saying that at all. He is saying that CGNAT is not proper internet unless IPv6 is available.

Yes, I could have phrased my post better (caffeine level was low ), but I'm no fan of CGNAT either.

Although I can see that late-comers to the ISP business may not have much option.

In reply to a post by MHC:

I don't need to worry ... mine is well back and the CSP is internal!

Just is some older locations I see them and can see how easy it would be to wreck the connections for a whole street in just a few minutes.

Same has been true for Virgin Media / cable companies since their inception but no evidence of mass issues.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

There was, a couple of years ago, installs where the fibre went directly in, and a connector was fitted straight on that (they were pants) but no splice required.

My original install in 2019 was of that type. However a tree damaged the drop cable in a winter storm. It was replaced and an internal splice point introduced / installed. But we still have the original field-fit SC/APC connector at the ONT, which touch wood, has remained ok and is now on its 3rd ONT 😂

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

Same has been true for Virgin Media / cable companies since their inception but no evidence of mass issues.

I came across a Virgin Media cabinet not that long ago that had been pushed completely over on it back (where it was located it couldn't have been a vehicle) and seen other mindless vandalism here and there but nothing in high volumes. With some new builds estates the CSPs are within reach of a persons foot walking past so could easily be damaged if somebody wanted to.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

You say about the funding comes from for many of these Alt Nets, but BT have not been British for years, even if they do have British in their name. Who are their shareholders?

There is quite a difference between a publicly quoted company on a stock exchange that you could , if you wished , purchase a share of , and a company backed by ‘private’ capital , the origin of which can be opaque.

You have bucked the trend there then

It’s surely done for now. We’ve invoked Murphy / the gods will be displeased 😂

I'm delighted with what I have got. 8 Gbit is just fine.

Who you you feel the need to tell people what they want or need.
You have done it on multiple threads thinking you know that people are not getting FTTP because in your opinion they only need 25meg internet.

With openreach giving incentives to get people off crumbling cable networks now (a change to the previous L2C model of openreach) and openreach having a good stable footprint of FTTP it is obvious that the FTTC network is going just accept it and stop wandering the streets trying to stop people getting an internet speed you dont think they should have.

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

I'm delighted with what I have got. 8 Gbit is just fine.

We would all love a small slice of that

I would love an Openreach FTTP service that could supply an IP4 addreess.

However I live in Newham in a 14 story MDU (Block of flats in layman's terms) where the powers that be decided waste money using Community Fibre so I'm sticking with a slower FTTC as I'm a gamer. I'll only get a Community Fibre service if the line degrades to be unusable as a CGNAT service is better than no service (but only just).

In reply to a post by MHC:

I don't need to worry ... mine is well back and the CSP is internal!

Just is some older locations I see them and can see how easy it would be to wreck the connections for a whole street in just a few minutes.

If you are going to worry about that, then you will not stick anything out the front, including a car if you have one.

In reply to a post by billford:

Yes, I could have phrased my post better (caffeine level was low ), but I'm no fan of CGNAT
either.

Although I can see that late-comers to the ISP business may not have much option.

That is a good reason, caffeine level being low,

I only know about CGNAT what I have read, and it don't seem to be a good idea, but not sure what difference IPv6 would make.

I am not really up on it these days, just snippets that I read.

In reply to a post by Iniltous:

There is quite a difference between a publicly quoted company on a stock exchange that you could , if you wished , purchase a share of , and a company backed by ‘private’ capital , the origin of which can be opaque.

How so? The main shareholders of the company may not fit with your views. BT a few major shareholders, something called Hartford Mutual Funds INC, owns 26 million shares, you don't know what they have invested in or the other 10 or so large shareholders.


If you are thinking that way, then you are not going to do anything. I bet these people still buy stuff produced in China, a country that is supporting Russia

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

I'm delighted with what I have got. 8 Gbit is just fine.

But why do you need that?
Not saying you should not, but unless you are a business and have a load of devices connected to it, then you are not going to use anywhere near that speed. I presume that is not normal FTTP.

In reply to a post by pyarwood:

Who you you feel the need to tell people what they want or need.
You have done it on multiple threads thinking you know that people are not getting FTTP because in your opinion they only need 25meg internet.

I don;t tell anyone what they should or should not have, at the end of the day it is up to people if they want to pay out for something that they don't use.

I just wonder why some people feel the need to have super-duper high speeds, when in reality the majority could pay less and not notice any difference.

I got someone to downgrade a couple of months ago, they were pushed into having 1Gb/s by their broadband provider when they joined up, because that seems to happen, with broadband providers trying to get more money out of people and some people don't have a clue what they really need.
I went through with them what they were using their broadband for and found it listening to music, maybe doing a bit of streaming, using their tablet or phone and that was it. Knocked over £15 a month off their bill just by reducing the speed, and they know no difference.

25Mb/s is a bit slow, around the 35Mb/s is okay and again for many people will do the job, even for the person I was on about above, but what they have now they got for a good price. They rely on benefits, so every pound counts.

This what worries me, broadband providers trying to get people onto the higher speeds to grab more money and people not knowing any difference. Companies are there to make money and they will do what it takes.

I have 500Mb/s at the moment, but I am looking at reducing it when my contract ends, unless they can do me a deal, just like I am going to get rid of Disney for a while as I don't use it that much.

There are also some people who have higher speeds just to tell their mates they have higher speeds. Not many I doubt, but I bet there are some.

With openreach giving incentives to get people off crumbling cable networks now (a change to the previous L2C model of openreach) and openreach having a good stable footprint of FTTP it is obvious that the FTTC network is going just accept it and stop wandering the streets trying to stop people getting an internet speed you dont think they should have.

I don't wander the streets trying to stop people getting faster speeds.
Do you think I knock on peoples door and say, excuse me, but don't get faster broadband speeds?

I just walk to different places maybe more people should try it instead of getting in their cars, and it is just something I look at now and again, just like I look at the trees and flowers, l not there is much of that where I walk.

openbreach is only doing what they are doing so fast because of the Altnets. Bloated toad don't like competition.

In reply to a post by arendall667:

I would love an Openreach FTTP service that could supply an IP4 addreess.

However I live in Newham in a 14 story MDU (Block of flats in layman's terms) where the powers that be decided waste money using Community Fibre so I'm sticking with a slower FTTC as I'm a gamer. I'll only get a Community Fibre service if the line degrades to be unusable as a CGNAT service is better than no service (but only just).

Sorry to hear that, would a VPN help with CGNAT? I did read a while ago it can. The problem is, then you may get a higher ping, but just as test, I have just done a speed test and I got full speed over 500Mb/s and a ping of 8ms using Proton VPN.
So not bad considering it is going through a VPN.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I only know about CGNAT what I have read, and it don't seem to be a good idea, but not sure what difference IPv6 would make.

The difference that IPv6 makes is that it circumvents CGNAT [unless you have a braindead ISP]. So no sharing of IP addresses with wrongun's vandalising Wikipedia, no overhead of double NAT.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

... not sure what difference IPv6 would make.

I am not really up on it these days, just snippets that I read.

I'm no expert either, but as I understand it (and I'm definitely open to correction!):

IPv6 doesn't make any inherent difference, and CGNAT would still be needed to connect to sites that only understood IPv4. Of which there are still quite a few

IPv4 addresses are in short supply so CGNAT allows an ISP to have more concurrent (IPv4) users than the number of IPv4 addresses they own; in effect my LAN here would be a "sub-LAN" on one of their "super-LANs", I would only have a "second-hand" connection to the internet.

But there's no shortage of IPv6 addresses, so it would "bypass" the aforementioned "super-LAN" (and any limitations the ISP saw fit to impose upon it) and give me my "own" connection.

There's also what could be seen as an aesthetic consideration- any form of NAT is something of a kludge to overcome a limitation (insufficient address bits) in the underlying design of the original IPv4 protocol; when there's a well-established method of avoiding it, it's inelegant and (at best) smacks of penny-pinching not to incorporate it.

And although I'm just a domestic user and would probably manage perfectly well with a CGNAT'ed, IPv4 only, connection, I'm picky


(I'm aware that the above is probably barely even a Class 101 picture of how things work, and that the words in quotes probably aren't the best ones to use, but I hope my meaning is clear enough.)

My BRSK recently installed defaults to a static IPv6 for the router and the connection tbb speed test sees is my device's IPv6. The IPv4 is dynamic with an extra monthly charge for static. IIRC the Ts & Cs say they retain the right to use CGNAT on the dynamic version. I expect they haven't enough customers yet to use up all their IPv4 addresses.

What do you mean about the TB speed test seeing IPv6 as static? When I do a test, it don't say anything about IPV4 or IPv6

I have not noticed if my IPv6 is static or not.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

When I do a test, it don't say anything about IPV4 or IPv6

Mine says "IPv6 Enabled" at the bottom: https://ibb.co/MDR80KWk

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

What do you mean about the TB speed test seeing IPv6 as static? When I do a test, it don't say anything about IPV4 or IPv6

I get 2 choices, Run Test and Run IPv4.

Yes, I get the same, but at the very bottom left corner it also states "IPv6 Enabled".
The Run Test uses IPv6 and the Run IPv4 uses IPv4, or at least that's what it does on my setup.

Edited by Adduxi (Thu 17-Apr-25 12:01:13)

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

What do you mean about the TB speed test seeing IPv6 as static?

That isn't what I said. I said the router gets a static IPv6 address, which I think is normal for all providers. (Though I think I read a poster on this site saying their's is dynamic. Which to me seeems very odd).

The thinkbroadband IPv6 speed test detects the testing device's address not the router's whereas on IPv4 it detects the router. Also the tbb "What is my IP" tool gives an IPv6 address, and a silly "You are connected to us on IPv6!! Yay!"

Similarly the BQM at setup time on an IPv6 connection picks up the device not the router, which is why users need to edit the detected address to the router one.

If I use one of the "What is my IP address services" the IPv6 address is provided immediately, the IPv4 one a second or so later How they arrive at that interests me, they must be using a variation on tracert or some similar "trick".

When I do a test, it don't say anything about IPV4 or IPv6

I have not noticed if my IPv6 is static or not.

As per the intervening posts. If you are using a test that provides history and the address of each test it's easy enough to check. If not, just note the last few quartets with a day or so gap.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

the router gets a static IPv6 address, which I think is normal for all providers. (Though I think I read a poster on this site saying their's is dynamic. Which to me seeems very odd).

The normal and intended way IPv6 operates is prefix delegation, which means that the customer gets a /48 or /56 block of addresses, one of which is allocated for the router, which in the basic case works with a /64 block subnet. The /48 or /56 block is a permanent allocation to the customer, even if the mechanism of the delegation is effectively dynamic. However, some ISPs allocate just a /64 block to the customer and do so dynamically, ie the customer does not get a fixed block, quite contrary to the intentions of IPv6

I know. I was with AAISP for several years and looked into all that when I joined them. The point I was making is that brsk does not provide that information, unless it has changed its Help pages since October. I signed up then and checked it out but the expected late November live on my estate didn't happen. It came on 3 April.

In respect of AAISP itself, the router address is completely different from the user's allocation. See this page.

If I remember I'll check if brsk is more helpful later. I can also of course try to work it out from my local addresses . In terms of my current connection it isn't anything I feel I need to know.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

I said the router gets a static IPv6 address, which I think is normal for all providers. (Though I think I read a poster on this site saying their's is dynamic. Which to me seeems very odd).

It's actually the opposite, most IPv6 addresses live on BT and Sky, and both providers utilise dynamic IPv6 addresses.

Nothing to do with IPv6 address exhaustion of course, much more to do with users not being associated with (and be trackable by) the same IP block for years.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

It's actually the opposite, most IPv6 addresses live on BT and Sky, and both providers utilise dynamic IPv6 addresses.

Nothing to do with IPv6 address exhaustion of course, much more to do with users not being associated with (and be trackable by) the same IP block for years.

My global Vodafone IPv6 is proving to be Dynamic and seems to change every few days, even without the triggers that would update IPv4 such as a router reboot etc.

In reply to a post by dgilbert2:

My global Vodafone IPv6 is proving to be Dynamic and seems to change every few days, even without the triggers that would update IPv4 such as a router reboot etc.

A different temporary address within your existing prefix, or a completely new prefix? I wouldn't expect a new prefix every few days, it typically happens on power down, firmware update, isp maintenance, i.e. fairly infrequently.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

In reply to a post by dgilbert2:

My global Vodafone IPv6 is proving to be Dynamic and seems to change every few days, even without the triggers that would update IPv4 such as a router reboot etc.

A different temporary address within your existing prefix, or a completely new prefix? I wouldn't expect a new prefix every few days, it typically happens on power down, firmware update, isp maintenance, i.e. fairly infrequently.

A completely new prefix, e.g. around 8:30pm last night, no restarts or loss of service, so is completely out the blue and unexpected.

How can a user be tracked by a "static" block, whether a /48, /60 (AA do those apparently), or a /64, given constantly changing dynamic temporary addresses within that block?

In reply to a post by pluralist:

How can a user be tracked by a "static" block, whether a /48, /60 (AA do those apparently), or a /64, given constantly changing dynamic temporary addresses within that block?

Well let's take an example prefix, most people will be assigned a /64:
24e9:3a77:d52e:5b9b/64

Regardless of temporary addressing, every IP address that subscriber will use for years will begin with 24e9:3a77:d52e:5b9b, and therefore they are very easily trackable.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

Well let's take an example prefix, most people will be assigned a /64:
24e9:3a77:d52e:5b9b/64

Regardless of temporary addressing, every IP address that subscriber will use for years will begin with 24e9:3a77:d52e:5b9b, and therefore they are very easily trackable.

Not all internet is consumed by individuals or even by families. Much is taken by company networks, which means that random addresses within a prefix range cannot be assumed to correlate with an individual or a family.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

Not all internet is consumed by individuals or even by families. Much is taken by company networks, which means that random addresses within a prefix range cannot be assumed to correlate with an individual or a family.

No assuming required, databases exist which identify which IP addresses are used for what purpose.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

databases exist which identify which IP addresses are used for what purpose.

So where can I check what my IPv6 prefix is used for? It could be associated to an ISP. But more than that?

In reply to a post by DFScale:

So where can I check what my IPv6 prefix is used for? It could be associated to an ISP. But more than that?

It's possible, for instance, to identify which IPv6 addresses are utilised by customers of Sky Broadband, and if they were statically assigned then it would be possible to track the activity of one household over a period of time.

Yes, there would need to be assumptions made as to whether the range has changed hands due to the customer leaving the ISP, but it still means IP address ranges are associated with households far longer than if the IPv6 prefixes were dynamic.

A single /64 subnet has 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 usable host addresses.

That's for each device the customer possesses.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

A single /64 subnet has 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 usable host addresses.

That's for each device the customer possesses.

I wasn't talking about device level tracking, I was talking household level. A household with a static /64 IPv6 prefix would be just as trackable as a household with a static IPv4 address.

Once you start talking about household level, which I have never seen mentioned on these forums over 19 years but admit to only following about 20, you thereby say that anyone on a static IPv4 is easily tracked.

Does anyone worry about that?

Interestingly I see on this laptop my IPv6 lease is:
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 24 April 2025 14:46:07
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 24 April 2025 16:46:10

I assume the same is true of that on my phone, which i see also has a randomised MAC address.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

Does anyone worry about that?

Privacy is a huge topic when it comes to internet usage, IP addresses certainly play a part.

Households not having persistent IP addresses is preferable to some, enough in fact for most of the major ISPs to use dynamic addressing for both IPv4 and IPv6.

Edited by Oliver341 (Thu 24-Apr-25 21:20:03)

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

Privacy is a huge topic when it comes to internet usage, IP addresses certainly play a part.

Most internet tracking has long given up trying to use the IP; CGNAT has been very common in Asia, and now appearing in Europe with v4 exhaustion and new ISPs.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Most internet tracking has long given up trying to use the IP; CGNAT has been very common in Asia, and now appearing in Europe with v4 exhaustion and new ISPs.

What about IPv6?

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

Households not having persistent IP addresses is preferable to some, enough in fact for most of the major ISPs to use dynamic addressing for both IPv4 and IPv6.

Dynamic Addressing on IPv4 is not necessarily what you might expect.

Static Addressing is when the router is configured with the WAN IP address as part of setting it up. Dynamic Addressing is when the ISP configures the WAN address as part of the connection protocol. Often the Dynamically Allocated IP address remains the same over months and years, even though it is set each time the router connects.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

What about IPv6?

I suspect due to the high use of mobile devices and that cellular is mostly proxied on v4 and v6, that tracking of advertising has had no choice but to do all the other stuff (browser fingerprinting, and similar) that you can see in the EU case against Meta recently and Google prior.

I was referring to when household retains the same IP address for months or years. Call it whatever you wish.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

I suspect due to the high use of mobile devices and that cellular is mostly proxied on v4 and v6

Mobile broadband would be far more likely to be dynamically addressed and shared, I agree.

Home broadband is another matter, and statically addressing IPv6 would be trivial, and ranges in use by consumer ISPs easily identifiable as such. There would still be valuable data to be had, in that.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

I was referring to when household retains the same IP address for months or years. Call it whatever you wish.

Someone up thread just said

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

Households not having persistent IP addresses is preferable to some, enough in fact for most of the major ISPs to use dynamic addressing for both IPv4 and IPv6.

I was trying to point out that a headline declaration of dynamic addressing from an ISP can and often does result in a household retaining a WAN IP address for months and years. It's not a matter of what I am calling it, it is what you are saying the ISPs call it.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

I was trying to point out that a headline declaration of dynamic addressing from an ISP can and often does result in a household retaining a WAN IP address for months and years. It's not a matter of what I am calling it, it is what you are saying the ISPs call it.

Everyone knew what I was talking about, you are not adding value to the conversation.

Everyone except yourself LOL.

We used to call it a sticky (dynamic) address.