Forum Index | Search | Register (New User) | Login (Existing User) | Who's Online | FAQ | Main Site

User comments on ISPs
  >> Other Providers (without dedicated forums) Previous thread View all threads Next thread


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | [3] | 4 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User Andrue
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Thu 15-Jun-23 22:30:00
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: jchamier] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by jchamier:
In reply to a post by E300:
If an ISP can't get IPv6 working this day and age then you have to question a) Just how good is their kit b) Just how good is their networking knowledge.
Major popular ISPs such as Plusnet and Virgin Media don’t support IPv6… no demand and probably some cost they don’t see it worth incurring.
Yes, they are popular but neither are extolled for their technical excellence which rather makes my point.

---
Andrue Cope
Brackley, UK

Edited by Andrue (Thu 15-Jun-23 22:30:49)
Standard User Thaumaturge
(member) Thu 15-Jun-23 22:47:17
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: candlerb] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by candlerb:
However if you're behind an IPv4 CGNAT, that does apply a lot of limits to what you can do with your Internet connection. Not only can you not receive *any* inbound connections at all, but you are sharing a public IP address with other people: so if one of them does something bad, Plod may come knocking at your door.

Having Plod come knocking is perhaps a tad extreme. It would have to be pretty serious for them to go through all the ISP's routing tables to distinguish me from all the other concurrent users of that public IP, though I'm sure GCHQ could do that easily if they wanted to. But being behind CGNAT for the first time now, I do find:
1) there seems to be an increased incidence of those wretched reCaptcha things (pick all the squares with US style fire hydrants);
2) I have an issue with email non-delivery to some contacts, which is very hard to pin down as they just disappear completely, but I suspect has at least something to do with the reputation of someone/something else sharing my IPv4 address;
3) I'm not bothered about hosting games or websites locally, but I can't run a BQM.
In reply to a post by smouty:
Or also c) question whether there is any actual demand from their customers.

In Swish's case at least, this can not be the case, I have made my views very clear to them, as I know others have too. I don't see why I should pay extra for a static IPv4 to work around a glaring deficiency in their network. I have told them I will not recommend Swish to any friends or neighbours until they fix it. I would leave myself if I had an acceptable alternative.
Standard User jchamier
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Fri 16-Jun-23 10:33:21
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: Andrue] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by Andrue:
Yes, they are popular but neither are extolled for their technical excellence which rather makes my point.
But 5+ million customers don't leave/complain about the lack of v6, so its not impacting business. For technical excellence I would be with AAISP if I could have got 50/10 I would have, but OR wires and crosstalk didn't support.

23 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User jchamier
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Fri 16-Jun-23 10:34:21
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: candlerb] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by candlerb:
However if you're behind an IPv4 CGNAT, that does apply a lot of limits to what you can do with your Internet connection. Not only can you not receive *any* inbound connections at all, but you are sharing a public IP address with other people: so if one of them does something bad, Plod may come knocking at your door.
The ISP will keep records of which customer has which internal IP and CGNAT mapping for RIPA compliance.

23 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
Standard User smouty
(committed) Fri 16-Jun-23 10:58:27
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: candlerb] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by candlerb:
...However if you're behind an IPv4 CGNAT, that does apply a lot of limits to what you can do with your Internet connection. Not only can you not receive *any* inbound connections at all...


I'm pretty sure the internet wouldn't work without *ANY* inbound connections wink

The takeaway is that you have to use a service that meets your requirements and CGNAT is perfectly acceptable for 99% of internet users who don't give a rodents behind about their ISPs 'technical ability' as long as it works for Netflix and Facebook.

For those that want self-hosting or VPNs etc then choose a service that supports it rather than moaning about it not but I agree that IF IPv6 was supported it would alleviate a number of edge cases and people like us using prosumer grade routers, BCM, separate APs etc are very much edge cases.

OPNSense on Topton N100 - SWISH Fibre 900
PiHole/AdGuard home - Unifi for Wifi
My Broadband Ping
Standard User jchamier
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Fri 16-Jun-23 13:12:07
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: smouty] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by smouty:
I'm pretty sure the internet wouldn't work without *ANY* inbound connections wink
In firewall terms, "inbound" usually means unsolicited inbound, quite different to "replies" to requests that have gone out. Stateful firewalls and NAT tables etc. or connection-tracking as (conntrack) as Linux modules called it.

23 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
Standard User smouty
(committed) Fri 16-Jun-23 13:57:56
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: jchamier] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by jchamier:
In reply to a post by smouty:
I'm pretty sure the internet wouldn't work without *ANY* inbound connections wink
In firewall terms, "inbound" usually means unsolicited inbound, quite different to "replies" to requests that have gone out. Stateful firewalls and NAT tables etc. or connection-tracking as (conntrack) as Linux modules called it.


Thanks for mansplaining.

OPNSense on Topton N100 - SWISH Fibre 900
PiHole/AdGuard home - Unifi for Wifi
My Broadband Ping
Standard User jchamier
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Fri 16-Jun-23 16:53:08
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: smouty] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by smouty:
Thanks for mansplaining.
No need to be rude, and assuming gender. It was unclear from thread other knowledge.

23 years of broadband connectivity since 1999 trial - Live BQM
Standard User behuk
(newbie) Fri 16-Jun-23 21:06:37
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: jchamier] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by jchamier:
In reply to a post by E300:
If an ISP can't get IPv6 working this day and age then you have to question a) Just how good is their kit b) Just how good is their networking knowledge.
Major popular ISPs such as Plusnet and Virgin Media don’t support IPv6… no demand and probably some cost they don’t see it worth incurring.


The need for Plusnet and Virgin to adopt IPv6 is reduced because those ISPs are hording large amounts of IPv4 address space -- e.g. Plusnet have ~2.1 million addresses, and Virgin Media have ~9.4 million addresses. Avoiding Carrier-Grade NAT isn't the only reason why a consumer would want* IPv6, but I think it's the main one.

(* I suspect most consumers don't know what IPv6 is, but recognise the issues caused by Carrier Grade NAT such as poor IP reputation and issues with online gaming / other P2P applications)
Standard User Chrysalis
(legend) Wed 16-Aug-23 23:04:57
Print Post

Re: Swish Fibre: IPv6


[re: therioman] [link to this post] 		 
In reply to a post by therioman:
In reply to a post by Andrue:
In reply to a post by behuk:
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.
Same here. It's not an absence of functionality it just begs the question of why any newcomer ISP wouldn't implement IPv6 from day one. Is it ignorance? Is it a lack of technical ability or resources? Or do they just not care enough about the service they are providing?


The majority of altnets I've encountered have not got v6 support. Some of them have implemented CGNAT, but for whatever reason still not v6. It is alarmingly common.


Yeh I think thats pretty bad, the likes of Virgin Media have the excuse they have millions of customers on a single stack network they risk disconnecting if they make a technical error, and of course all their customers have a public IP so its less if an issue for them anyway.

A brand new ISP that is utilising CGNAT should be designing their network with v6 bedded in from day 1, there is no excuse, they must have done a rush to market network build. 

VM Gig1 - AAISP L2TP
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | [3] | 4 | (show all)   Print Thread

Previous thread View all threads Next thread
Jump to