Swish Fibre: IPv6

Breaking out from the (now closed) Swish Fibre megathread: has anyone heard any news about Swish Fibre's "IPv6 project"? Their lack of support for modern IP is by far my biggest bugbear.

Edited by behuk (Thu 08-Jun-23 21:06:50)

Not heard anything since it was mentioned on the mega-thread. Also saw that there are redundancies across the group that Swish is part of, presumably prior to a merger of the groups' various operations, so maybe it's dropped off their radar again.

I'd be interested to here why IPv6 would be of interest.

I had it on BT for years but never saw a use case TBH but I see it more of a privacy issue than a benefit.

In reply to a post by smouty:

I'd be interested to here why IPv6 would be of interest.

Many newer ISPs don't have any IPv4 space, so they have to put you on CGNAT, which prevents inbound connections. This limits some internet usage, e.g. hosting games, or connecting remotely into your network via a VPN etc.

If the ISP supplies routed IPv6, then the CGNAT for IPv4 is less of an issue, for all other networks where v6 is available. (ie, not Virgin Media!).

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by smouty:

I'd be interested to here why IPv6 would be of interest.

Many newer ISPs don't have any IPv4 space, so they have to put you on CGNAT, which prevents inbound connections. This limits some internet usage, e.g. hosting games, or connecting remotely into your network via a VPN etc.

If the ISP supplies routed IPv6, then the CGNAT for IPv4 is less of an issue, for all other networks where v6 is available. (ie, not Virgin Media!).

I think you can request a non CGNAT IP or pay a little more for a static address so they do offer perfectly reasonable alternatives which work.

In reply to a post by smouty:

I think you can request a non CGNAT IP or pay a little more for a static address so they do offer perfectly reasonable alternatives which work.

Some alt net ISPs have the options, but many charge a LOT more (monthly) for either a static, or public IPv4 as they have so few.

Edited by jchamier (Sat 10-Jun-23 10:44:13)

Tailscale also works behind CGNAT I believe so there are always options to work around it but best option is to order a service that has the features you require rather than what is ‘coming soon’.

Swish static IP is only £3 pm so not a dealbreaker by any stretch and at least it is an option unlike BT residential services.

In reply to a post by smouty:

Swish static IP is only £3 pm so not a dealbreaker by any stretch and at least it is an option unlike BT residential services.

Great news for those in Swish coverage areas. My area is currently being built by two separate companies, neither are Swish, or Openreach. Its unclear what either charge for a static v4 address, but a quick look shows they both support public v6.

In reply to a post by smouty:

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by smouty:

I'd be interested to here why IPv6 would be of interest.

Many newer ISPs don't have any IPv4 space, so they have to put you on CGNAT, which prevents inbound connections. This limits some internet usage, e.g. hosting games, or connecting remotely into your network via a VPN etc.

If the ISP supplies routed IPv6, then the CGNAT for IPv4 is less of an issue, for all other networks where v6 is available. (ie, not Virgin Media!).

I think you can request a non CGNAT IP or pay a little more for a static address so they do offer perfectly reasonable alternatives which work.

So yeah, a public IPv4 address is definitely helpful. But let's look at the maths...Swish have 9216 IPv4 addresses - assuming they sell them all to residential gigabit customers (each paying £50 + £3 per month), that limits their total annual revenue to ~£6m. Not bad, but I suspect a long way off the ambitions of Fern Fibre / Octopus Investments (I suppose they could buy more, but ~$40 per IP seems painfully expensive given the cost is avoidable). Obviously there are various incorrect assumptions here (e.g. they can't sell all the addresses as some will be required for infrastructure, some customers will buy cheaper packages, and some customers will be happy with CGNAT).

Thinking more broadly from a business perspective, I suspect a number of customers will have issues with CGNAT (e.g. performance, issues with gaming / P2P, etc.) and will write Swish off as opposed to paying for a public IP because most customers aren't hugely technical. Also, CGNAT appliances aren't cheap! IPv6 doesn't mitigate the need for CGNAT / NAT64 / some solution for accessing IPv4-only websites, but as IPv6 traffic increases fewer and fewer packets will need it.

In reply to a post by smouty:

Tailscale also works behind CGNAT I believe so there are always options to work around it but best option is to order a service that has the features you require rather than what is ‘coming soon’.

So from a technical perspective, I'd like IPv6 for a couple of reasons. Firstly I'd like to be able to connect to hosts using IPv6 (I use Mythic Beasts and Scaleway for hosting, and they both charge extra for public IPv4 addresses). Secondly, I'd like to be able to host from home using IPv6 -- e.g. experimentally using IPv6 for a k8s cluster. As you mention there are other solutions for inbound connectivity (e.g. tailscale, I personally use Cloudflare Tunnel for some use-cases) -- but IMO getting rid of RFC1918 addressing should be the long term goal (I appreciate this might be controversial, but let's not de-rail the thread!).

I could use a VPN / tunnel broker / etc. to get IPv6 connectivity, but it doesn't feel unreasonable to ask for native IPv6 in 2023, given the original IPv6 RFC was published over 26 years ago. As a techie, when I see a network cutting corners by not implementing IPv6, it makes me wonder what other corners they're cutting.

And yeah -- ideally I'd order symmetrical gigabit fibre with IPv6, but that's not yet available in my town (from Swish because their network doesn't yet support IPv6, or from Lightning Fibre because their build isn't ready yet). Overall I think Swish is the best option for me at the moment (symmetrical gigabit with a public IPv4 address is better than 80Mb down / 20Mb up with a /48 of IPv6, IMO).