Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
On Sun, 5 Sept 2021 at 08:25, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote: > - Municipal fiber - 1 Gbps - IPv4 only - $50 / month > - Local cable co. - ~100 Mbps - IPv4 and IPv6 - for $100 / month > - ILEC xDSL - ~50 Mbps - why would I look - for $100 month > > There may be cellular Internet options, but those aren't ... economical, > especially for streaming. > > Of those three which would you choose? Municipal fiber. Which is the point, you cannot capitalise offering IPv6, so offering it is bad for business. People who have adopted IPv6 have eaten into their margins for no utility. I view IPv6 as the biggest mistake of my career and feel responsible for this horrible outcome and I do apologise to Internet users for it. This dual-stack is the worst possible outcome, and we've been here over two decades, increasing cost and reducing service quality. We should have performed better, we should have been IPv6 only years ago. I wish 20 years ago big SPs would have signed a contract to drop IPv4 at the edge 20 years from now, so that we'd given everyone a 20 year deadline to migrate away. 20 years ago was the best time to do it, the 2nd best time is today. If we don't do it, 20 years from now, we are in the same position, inflating costs and reducing quality and transferring those costs to our end users who have to suffer from our incompetence. -- ++ytti
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
On 9/4/21 2:44 PM, Jeroen Massar via NANOG wrote: SixXS shut down 4 years ago, to get ISPs to move their butts... as long as there are tunnels, they do not have a business case. I saw that. See also https://www.sixxs.net/sunset/ and the "Call Your ISP for IPv6" thing in 2016: https://www.sixxs.net/wiki/Call_Your_ISP_for_IPv6 along with plans. I have contacted my ISP and inquired about IPv6 one or more times every year that I've been using them. You people keep on giving money to ISPs that are not providing the service you want. Are you talking generally or are you using me as an example (read: scapegoat)? -- It's okay if you are. I'd like to delve further into this idea. I have three ISPs in my town of just shy of 100k people within an hour drive of the largest city in the state of more than 700k people. - Municipal fiber - 1 Gbps - IPv4 only - $50 / month - Local cable co. - ~100 Mbps - IPv4 and IPv6 - for $100 / month - ILEC xDSL - ~50 Mbps - why would I look - for $100 month There may be cellular Internet options, but those aren't ... economical, especially for streaming. Of those three which would you choose? So ... I think I'm in quite the same position as John L. is. Tunnels are VPNs I concede the technical point and move on. So, that makes sense that services that need to 'protect their IP' (silly property) because they did not figure out people might live anywhere in the world might want to pay for things and receive service... [sic] I agree there is some questionable ... /thought/ going on somewhere. -- I'm reluctant to call it /logic/. I agree that some people are trying to circumvent geographical restrictions. However, my wife and I are not. We want to access content that's for the address we have on file with the companies, that we have service at, and that we receive the paper bills at. -- As I've stated before in other threads, I believe that companies are capable of adding 1 + 1 + 1 to get 3. If they /wanted/ to. As such, I can only surmise that they do not /want/ to correlate the multiple addresses and allow us to view content for the same market. IPv6 tunnels where meant as a transition mechanism, as a way for engineers to test IPv6 before it was wide spread. And seeing as how I can't get IPv6 natively from multiple providers that I've worked with in the last 20 years, I can only surmise that we as an industry are still transitioning from single stack to dual stack. Deploying IPv6 is easy, and due to IPv4-squeeze (unless you have slave monopoly money and can just buy 2% of the address space), you could have spent the last 25 years getting ready for this day. And especially in the last 5 - 10 years, deploying IPv6 has been easy, due to all the work by many many many people around the world in testing and actively deploying IPv6. Of course there are still platforms that don't support DHCPv6 for instance, but things are easy, stable and often properly battle tested. And yet here we are. As a consumer I have no effective influence. As this is NANOG and people on the list are ISPs and it is 2021, thus IPv6 being 25+ years old, the best that is left to do is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASXJgvy3mEg And that's arguably what my city did. They got together and installed municipal fiber. Save for the lack of IPv6, it wins on all counts; faster, cheaper, better customer service, and other non-technical perks. Just no IPv6. Hence why I have historically augmented my municipal GPON with an H.E. IPv6 tunnel. -- In fact, I am going to continue with said H.E. IPv6 tunnel, just without advertising it to the network (RA / DHCPv6). I will have to statically configure IPv6 on things that I want to use it on. The rest of the home network will be IPv4 only. I feel like 1995 called and want's their single stack Internet back. So, Jeroen, what would you recommend that people like John L. and myself do? -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 9:36 PM Mark Tinka wrote: > Supporting the routing and forwarding of IP addresses is just about the > most basic thing any ISP should do. > > If that is low on their to-do list, what else could they possibly be doing? > Counting all the profit they make from a captive audience with no competition? ;) -A
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
On 9/5/21 04:49, John Levine wrote: Well, some of us are. I have a choice of an excellent local fiber ISP that does not offer IPv6 or Spectrum cable which is generally awful but does have v6. So I use a tunnel. I have asked my ISP about IPv6 and their answer is that that they're not opposed to it but since I am the only person who has asked for it, it's quite low on the list of things to do. Supporting the routing and forwarding of IP addresses is just about the most basic thing any ISP should do. If that is low on their to-do list, what else could they possibly be doing? Mark.
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
On Sat, Sep 4, 2021, 22:49 John Levine wrote: > I have asked my ISP about IPv6 and their answer is that that they're not > opposed to > it but since I am the only person who has asked for it, it's quite low on > the list > of things to do. > Sounds like a consulting opportunity :) Thank you jms >
Re: Hurricane Ida updates
During the peak of the rain storm in NJ+NY (see flooding deaths referenced in previous email), the wireless emergency alert systems were sending, simultaneously: 1) TORNADO WARNING SEEK SHELTER NOW GO TO BASEMENT [1] 2) FLOOD WARNING SEEK HIGH GROUND GET OUT OF BASEMENTS [2] 1: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d=nyc+tornado+warning 2: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d=nyc+ida+flood+warning+wireless+emergency+alert On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 12:03 AM Sean Donelan wrote: > Two 19-year-old linemen died in an electrocution accident in Jefferson > County, Alabama assisting with storm recovery. Cause under investigation. > > at least 66 deaths confirmed: > 25 in New Jersey (at least 8 died in vehicle flooding), > 17 in New York (at least 11 died in basement apartment flooding), > 12 in Louisiana (4 died from CO poisoning), > 5 in Pennsylvania, > 2 in Mississippi, > 2 in Alabama, > 1 in Maryland, > 1 in Virginia, > 1 in Connecticut (state police officer vehicle flooding) > > Power outages (poweroutage.us) > > 756,173 Louisiana > 9,615 Pennsylvania > 7,256 Mississippi > > Entergy New Orleans no expects most power to be restored by September 8, > 2021. Reminder, Puerto Rico is still experiencing rolling blackouts > after 2017 hurricanes destroyed its power grid. > > > There were over 374 Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) issued nation-wide > between August 26, 2021 (initial Hurricane warnings) and September 2, > 2021. I'm still digging into how many WEA messages are related to > Hurricane Ida (HUW event codes) versus other severe weather events > elsewhere (e.g. FRW event codes - wildfire warnings in California). > > Remember your Roku, Amazon Firestick, Google TV, etc. streaming devices > don't alert you to emergency warnings. Amazon Alexa does have an > option to activate severe weather warnings on its Echo/Echo Show devices. > > Wireless Emergency Alert messages by EAS event code (codes don't appear in > the message itself) > > Event Count > CAE 7 Child Abduction > CDW 1 Civil Danger > CEM 3 Civil Emergency > DSW 3 Dust Storm > EVI 11 Immediate Evacuation > EWW 4 Extreme Winde > FFW 102 Flash Flood > FRW 10 Fire Warning > HMW 1 Hazardous Material > HUW 47 Hurricane > LAE 3 Local Area Emergency > LEW 5 Law Enforcement Warning > SPW 1 Shelter-in-Place > SSW 29 Storm Surge > SVR 7 Severe Thunderstorm > TOR 142 Tornado > > Grand Total 376 > > > > The FCC disaster reporting is limited to only 3 states (AL, LA, MS) > > 2 public safety answering points (9-1-1) partially re-routed > > FCC is not reporting any other states. > > > Wireless providers had open roaming and waiving overage charges through > Friday. I don't know how much longer they will keep open roaming > activated. > > 20% cell sites in Louisiana out of service (statewide average) > Louisiana counties: 55% of Plaquemines, 52% of LaFourche > > 1.4% in Alabama, 0.8% in Mississippi. > FCC not reporting any other states. > > > Cable and wireless outages (subscribers) in AL, LA, MS. > > 1,119 Alabama, > 427,587 Louisiana, > 2,157 Mississippi > > FCC not reporting any other states. > > > 2 TV, 9 FM and 4 AM stations reported out of service in AL, LA, MS. > > FCC not reporting any other states. >
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
According to Jeroen Massar via NANOG : >On 2021-09-04 23:02, Ryan Hamel wrote: >> Jeroen, >> >> > You people keep on giving money to ISPs that are not providing the >> service you want. >> >> Not everyone has the luxury of picking their ISP, > >But this list is NANOG Network Operators. We are the ISPs Well, some of us are. I have a choice of an excellent local fiber ISP that does not offer IPv6 or Spectrum cable which is generally awful but does have v6. So I use a tunnel. I have asked my ISP about IPv6 and their answer is that that they're not opposed to it but since I am the only person who has asked for it, it's quite low on the list of things to do. R's, John -- Regards, John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
* r...@rkhtech.org (Ryan Hamel) [Sat 04 Sep 2021, 23:04 CEST]: Not everyone has the luxury of picking their ISP, and the common consumer doesn't know or care about IPv6. They want Netflix to work and that's it. We just had a 100+ post thread about Netflix not working because CGNs were misclassified as VPN endpoints. -- Niels.
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
On 2021-09-04 23:02, Ryan Hamel wrote: Jeroen, > You people keep on giving money to ISPs that are not providing the service you want. Not everyone has the luxury of picking their ISP, But this list is NANOG Network Operators. We are the ISPs and the common consumer doesn't know or care about IPv6. And they indeed should not have to care. Good that this is not a consumer list, or a ISP complaint line (though, I guess complaining about peering or broken connectivity is in the charter) They want Netflix to work and that's it. They thus have no need for IPv6, which was the question... Netflix works mostly fine over IPv4 (or heck CGN as that is what one is likely headed to if your ISP did not get chunks of free IPv4 address space), it is actually still IPv6 where they sometimes have a few PMTU blackholes... ;) [though, have not noticed one in a while now] Greets, Jeroen
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
Jeroen, > You people keep on giving money to ISPs that are not providing the service you want. Not everyone has the luxury of picking their ISP, and the common consumer doesn't know or care about IPv6. They want Netflix to work and that's it. Ryan On Sat, Sep 4, 2021, 1:47 PM Jeroen Massar via NANOG wrote: > > > On 20210904, at 22:26, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Does anyone have any recommendation for a viable IPv6 tunnel broker / > provider in the U.S.A. /other/ /than/ Hurricane Electric? > > SixXS shut down 4 years ago, to get ISPs to move their butts... as long as > there are tunnels, they do not have a business case. > > See also https://www.sixxs.net/sunset/ and the "Call Your ISP for IPv6" > thing in 2016: https://www.sixxs.net/wiki/Call_Your_ISP_for_IPv6 along > with plans. > > You people keep on giving money to ISPs that are not providing the service > you want. > > > I reluctantly just disabled IPv6 on my home network, provided by > Hurricane Electric, because multiple services my wife uses are objecting to > H.E.'s IPv6 address space as so called VPN or proxy provider. Netflix, HBO > Max, Pandora, and other services that I can't remember at the moment have > all objected to H.E > > Tunnels are VPNs > > So, that makes sense that services that need to 'protect their IP' (silly > property) because they did not figure out people might live anywhere in the > world might want to pay for things and receive service... [sic] > > > IPv6 tunnels where meant as a transition mechanism, as a way for engineers > to test IPv6 before it was wide spread. > > Deploying IPv6 is easy, and due to IPv4-squeeze (unless you have slave > monopoly money and can just buy 2% of the address space), you could have > spent the last 25 years getting ready for this day. And especially in the > last 5 - 10 years, deploying IPv6 has been easy, due to all the work by > many many many people around the world in testing and actively deploying > IPv6. Of course there are still platforms that don't support DHCPv6 for > instance, but things are easy, stable and often properly battle tested. > > > > > Disabling IPv6 feels *SO* *WRONG*! But fighting things; hacking DNS, > null routing prefixes, firewalling, etc., seems even more wrong. > > > > Is there a contemporary option for home users like myself who's ISP > doesn't offer native IPv6? > > As this is NANOG and people on the list are ISPs and it is 2021, thus > IPv6 being 25+ years old, the best that is left to do is: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASXJgvy3mEg > > Go Jared! > > Greets, > Jeroen > >
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
> On 20210904, at 22:26, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone have any recommendation for a viable IPv6 tunnel broker / > provider in the U.S.A. /other/ /than/ Hurricane Electric? SixXS shut down 4 years ago, to get ISPs to move their butts... as long as there are tunnels, they do not have a business case. See also https://www.sixxs.net/sunset/ and the "Call Your ISP for IPv6" thing in 2016: https://www.sixxs.net/wiki/Call_Your_ISP_for_IPv6 along with plans. You people keep on giving money to ISPs that are not providing the service you want. > I reluctantly just disabled IPv6 on my home network, provided by Hurricane > Electric, because multiple services my wife uses are objecting to H.E.'s IPv6 > address space as so called VPN or proxy provider. Netflix, HBO Max, Pandora, > and other services that I can't remember at the moment have all objected to > H.E Tunnels are VPNs So, that makes sense that services that need to 'protect their IP' (silly property) because they did not figure out people might live anywhere in the world might want to pay for things and receive service... [sic] IPv6 tunnels where meant as a transition mechanism, as a way for engineers to test IPv6 before it was wide spread. Deploying IPv6 is easy, and due to IPv4-squeeze (unless you have slave monopoly money and can just buy 2% of the address space), you could have spent the last 25 years getting ready for this day. And especially in the last 5 - 10 years, deploying IPv6 has been easy, due to all the work by many many many people around the world in testing and actively deploying IPv6. Of course there are still platforms that don't support DHCPv6 for instance, but things are easy, stable and often properly battle tested. > > Disabling IPv6 feels *SO* *WRONG*! But fighting things; hacking DNS, null > routing prefixes, firewalling, etc., seems even more wrong. > > Is there a contemporary option for home users like myself who's ISP doesn't > offer native IPv6? As this is NANOG and people on the list are ISPs and it is 2021, thus IPv6 being 25+ years old, the best that is left to do is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASXJgvy3mEg Go Jared! Greets, Jeroen
IPv6 woes - RFC
Hi, Does anyone have any recommendation for a viable IPv6 tunnel broker / provider in the U.S.A. /other/ /than/ Hurricane Electric? I reluctantly just disabled IPv6 on my home network, provided by Hurricane Electric, because multiple services my wife uses are objecting to H.E.'s IPv6 address space as so called VPN or proxy provider. Netflix, HBO Max, Pandora, and other services that I can't remember at the moment have all objected to H.E. Disabling IPv6 feels *SO* *WRONG*! But fighting things; hacking DNS, null routing prefixes, firewalling, etc., seems even more wrong. Is there a contemporary option for home users like myself who's ISP doesn't offer native IPv6? Please consider this to be a Request for Comments and suggestions. Thank you and have a nice day / weekend / holiday. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
