Forum Discussion
1,493 Replies
- VMCopperUserWise owl
What I don't get (other than no invite, they don't send me invites to do test any longer lol).. But what I don't get is why they are going to test DS-Lite. If it's to do with their wifi anywhere type of system then I think it's great, It just means that now your ipv4 address can follow your devices around right?
The reason I don't get it is that they have (or did have?) a lot more IP's than what they need for their current user base, so why add in any form of NAT when it's not currently needed. And if everyone moves to DS-Lite then that means all home hosting is going to stop on the IPv4 layer.
It seems like they went from one extreme to the other extreme. So does this mean Full Dual-Stack is off the table for the test, or off the table for good? Another thing I would be interested in is IF they move to a DS-Lite system would users be able to only use the IPv6 component of this, or will it be a requirement to use the IPV4 in IPV6 wrap.
Regardless of how they decide to deploy it. It's about time they actually started doing something.
- Anonymous
Moving everyone to DS-Lite would allow them to flog off large chunks of their IPv4 addresses. These have significant value at the moment but this may not last for ever.
DS-Lite is a transition mechanism to an IPv6 only Internet. I wouldn't be surprised to see BT & Sky deploy this at some point in the future as (hopefully) the IPv4 Internet starts to become less relevant. VM (and other current DS-Lite providers) clearly would like to skip the full IPv4/IPv6 Dual Stack deployment. Understand where they're coming from, money doesn't grow on trees....but it seems very early.
Yes DS-Lite will kill all local IPv4 hosting.
- ravenstar68Very Insightful Person
Anonymous wrote:Yes DS-Lite will kill all local IPv4 hosting.
There are ways of still hosting on IPv4 even on a DS-Lite setting.
- mhmeadows63Joining in
I recently had an engineer visit to improve cabl signal levels and took the opportunity to ask if he had any knowledge of an IPv6 rollout schedule.
He had none, but promised to get back to me with an answer. This, he did within a few days.
He reported that the initial focus is on upgrading business connections and that he had been unable to identify a schedule for starting residential upgrades.
Disappointing, but could it be that the observed growth fits this story?
- jeffsmith82On our wavelength
We are currently up for renewal and Virgin don't appear to offer IPv6 but if we go through a re-seller they do so possibly they are letting re-sellers trial it for their customers first before virgin support it.
I would imagine business first would make sense as we tend to buy static IPv4 addresses so don't have to do CGNAT.
- VMCopperUserWise owl
Most people who sit on those sales booths know nothing about the service. They were just hoping to get a new customer sales bonus from you.
- ksimUp to speed
Hi Everyone
Trying to get IPv6, HE tunnel looks like capped by VM on 20Mbit/s, any other way to get IPv6 working?
- Anonymous
That doesn't sound right. I don't have any problems running close to full speed over my HE tunnel. Here's a test I've just run over IPv6 (verified in Wireshark to be sure):
https://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/1562670348732080055 (84.4Mbps)
and over straight IPv4 non-tunneled VM connection:
https://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/1562671135720630755 (111.91 Mbps)
The difference in speed is a little surprising. I've seen the IPv6 be within a few % of the raw connection. Perhaps LINX or the tunnel server is a bit busy at the moment. No throttle at 20Mbps though.
- adhawkinsUp to speed
I do get lower speeds on my HE connection. My main connection is 350 MBits I think, but I rarely get more than 150 or 200 over IP6 if memory serves.
I haven't really paid too much attention to it to be honest, as it's still 'fast enough'.
Andy
- ksimUp to speed
after switching to M200, still the same issue, download is shaped at 20Mbit/s using HE.
- adhawkinsUp to speed
How are you testing your ipv6 speed?
I just ran a test here: http://test.telenor.net/
I was monitoring traffic through my internet gateway, and it was definitely going through HE. I got full rate up and down.
However, repeating the tests now I'm getting much lower rates, so I wonder if HE have some sort of throttling if you use a large amount of data in a short time?
Andy
- ksimUp to speed
I tried thinkbroadband, ipv6-test, just downloading a file from a resource with high-speed net I am sure about, didn't consume high traffic before the test, it is always like that, I doubt it is HE as we will be seeing a lot of complaints about that on HE forum.
- ksimUp to speed
Why even mention the shortage of IPv4???!!! 1 public IP per customer is not enough in the current world, and things like Nest Protect are not working without IPv6, there are a lot of tools and devices I want to have public IP, and the number of technology requires IPv6 is growing.
Let's have a few facts established:
- modern technology requires IPv6, no IoT without IPv6
- if you do not have a shortage of IPv4, then the best way to move to IPv6 is DualStack
Anything VM is doing with IPv6 doesn't make any sense, from choosing DSLite to capping IPv6 tunnels. They are just looking incompetent, 6in4 in their view is single-threaded or "like VPN".
- VMCopperUserWise owl
Yea, I agree, If their user base was to climb fast enough to go past their IPv4 limit then they would be forced to introduce that NAT layer. So adopting it now is probably a good move as that limit being hit would be virtually transparent. Still, it should be possible when we do get CG-Nat for us all to have our own IP, similar to now, until such a time that they run out of v4's to hand out.
As for content providers. They have no huge incentive to move over to IPv6. They know users will have v4 - even if it's NAT v4 so why spend time time and effort rolling out their own DS solutions. I believe a lot of the providers don't want to move to IPv6 because of security/blocking issues. Right now it's easy to block an IP range/single address. That's going to become quite difficult with v6 as you'll need to kill huge blocks.
The biggest benefit is User to User hosting. Something that Content providers, Broadband providers, and most of the monetized industry out there cant benefit from. I have no doubt that User-Tracking/Ad services are also pushing back against IPv6. Creative IP changes could see that industry get stung.
I look forward to NAT going away. But it's difficult when no one wishes to lay the egg, or hatch it.
- Anonymous
Not sure that blocking is that much harder in IPv6 if you mask off at the /64 level. That said if people have build a whole toolchain tightly bound to IPv4 they're going to balk at the engineering changes needed.
Saw an article a month or two back that suggested it might take 20 years before a majority have migrated to IPv6. Was quite depressing.
What's needed is a killer app that only works on IPv6.
- ksimUp to speed
Anonymous wrote:
What's needed is a killer app that only works on IPv6.the app can't become a killer as will not work for the majority of users. chicken and egg.
But the things is: I am more than happy use HE or other tunnel provider, just do not cap the traffic!!!!
- matthewsteeplesDialled in
VMCopperUser wrote:The biggest benefit is User to User hosting. Something that Content providers, Broadband providers, and most of the monetized industry out there cant benefit from. I have no doubt that User-Tracking/Ad services are also pushing back against IPv6. Creative IP changes could see that industry get stung.
I look forward to NAT going away. But it's difficult when no one wishes to lay the egg, or hatch it.
That poses its own problems though. What are you going to be hosting that is going to be better on your VM upload bandwidth than on a server/CDN somewhere? It'll be fine for text pages, but all you'd need is 3-4 people streaming a video at once and your connection would grind to a halt. Any more than that and your users are going to be faced with buffering. If you want user to user hosting to take off, then we need to start looking at technologies such as https://ipfs.io which don't require IPv6 to work (as they punch holes and do lots of clever stuff) but would obviously benefit slightly from it.
Also, your IP address isn't currently a reliable tracking mechanism, as a) multiple people in a household share it and b) not every provider offers static (or "sticky" in the case of VM) addresses. Combine that with GDPR and I bet that advertisers aren't that bothered about it. If anything, IPv6 helps them because each user (for a given session) is guaranteed to not be sharing that address with anyone else. And if their OS doesn't cycle addresses for privacy reasons (defaults to on in Windows, but can be disabled) then they will always have the same IP address (assuming ISP keeps the prefix the same)
- VMCopperUserWise owl
Yea, I guess your correct about users having the same fixed IP now, perhaps that's a bit of a win some loose some sort of thing. I would imagine that once IPv6 is standard then obfuscation through IP rotation will become standard. Time will tell on that.
And User to User transmissions need not be high bandwidth, As it stands how 15 meg can push through 4k HDR without any issues, so even if users are opting for video streaming I don't think that would be a issue. Honestly when I say User to User hosting I am meaning other things like file sharing (Family Photos, Documents, that ilk), Voice and Video chat facilities, Playing games, home security, cans of bean inventory from the tracker in the kitchen. Not everyone wants to pirate Movies all day long ;P. I could see tor/darkweb services enjoying IPv6 a little, but probably not enough for it to even think about (not a fan personally).
Users looking to stream to multiple people/places have better options too - ones that support multicast.
One of the Bigger problems for ISP's would be User to User VPN's to get around GeoLocation. Once that Ipv4 NAT layer is removed, then routers should be able to cope a lot better with a high concurrent connection, It could (but probably won't) help bring down some of those GeoLocation walls we have.
- jamesmacwhiteSuperfast
I really hope the DS Lite approach is scrapped and the delay is because they are going dual stack like BT and Sky with a routed /56 or similar. Clearly Virgin Media are in no rush, so I'd rather the delay be for a better IPv6 implementation.
No one wants DS Lite. Its unecessarily less friendly and complicated, makes running your own kit harder, without having modem mode you have to deal with extra network setup and you'll no longer be able to forward ports for IPv4.
- alan_sidawayOn our wavelength
i hope virgin are ready for ipv6, i found this page interesting https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/10/this-time-there-really-are-no-ipv4-internet-addresses-left.html
- shanematthewsProblem sorter
That article makes it out to be worse than it is, all it means is there are no "new" blocks of IP's to be handed out, companies still have access to all their currently assigned IP blocks, and ISP's always have more than they actually currently need so it won't actually make any difference, it just means you won't get any new IPv4 companies springing up unless they are renting addresses from another company
- VMCopperUserWise owl
Hopefully the trial gave indications that they would need to give a lot of customer support.
Staff cost are something they seem to hate paying (Going by the complaints over the past few months about long wait times to even speak to someone I can only imagine whole departments are being exited?).
So if it looks like it will need a lot of customer support, they will look for another option. (My personal view)
- cje85Wise owl
You need to try and convince Ofcom and the ASA that VM's lack of IPv6 is such a dreadful national scandal, then perhaps something might change.
Taken from the other forum, their current view is:
"The ASA rejected that complaint on the basis that: Most consumers wouldn't consider IPv6 as part of their purchase decision, therefore it won't affect what ISP they go with.
OFCOM have rejected it on the basis that IPv6 is entirely optional in the UK and they regard IPv4 as sufficient."
- MorgaineSuperfast
cje85: I replied to your message right after you linked the ThinkBroadBand thread, but on reflection perhaps it wasn't obvious that I was making a reply, my bad.
I won't repeat the spiel, but in summary, (i) we can at least talk to regulators, and (ii) times they are a-changing. On 1st January 2021 we are officially in heightened competition with the countries of the EU bloc. It is a strong reason for regulators, politicians and media to examine the issue with fresh eyes.
- MorgaineSuperfast
The US federal government many years ago required all subcontractors to support IPv6. It seems that now they're beginning Phase 2 of the plan:
- "US Government Plan to Complete IPv6 Transition"
- https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/fcs0jw/us_government_plan_to_complete_ipv6_transition/
The Reddit post provides a short summary of the milestones involved in US Gov's move to IPv6-only internally.
No surprise at all there, anything else would be future-blind to the point of insanity. IPv4 is like trying to fit the ocean in a thimble, and a broken thimble at that.
- aleksmariuszDialled in
If you want IPv6 support on Virgin Media sooner (rather than who-knows-when later), you may need to take matters into your own hands.
I haven't had a chance to read all 100+ pages of this topic so this info may not be new, but that's what i did this weekend. I have Virgin Media Fibre 100M Broadband (started with 50M a few years ago, that is a story in and of itself).
The results:
(NTL listed above is the old name before Virgin Media rebranded)
Ok of course this is not an admission that Virgin Media lack of IPv6 is excusable by any means. Just that if you want something enough, sometimes you have to do it yourself.
My setup is basically the original Hub3 Virgin Media router/modem, however i also set up a linux host on my home network running pi-hole, that provides ad-blocked DNS services for my entire home LAN. So on that system, I simply utilized the free Hurricane Electric tunnelbroker offering, which sets up for you (on their side) a tunnel to the IPv6 based internet over your IPv4 network. They also provide instructions for the setup on your side and it was more straightforward than i imagined.
And voila, IPv6 on Virgin Media.. If folks are interested in the gory technical steps, I can set up a separate post.
You can also of course go the simpler route and set up IPv6 connectivity on an individual host basis more easily (H.E gives you up 5 tunnels per account) if you don't need your entire LAN with IPv6 connectivity.
- Anonymous
What sort of performance are you able to get? Many of us are finding our HE tunnel speed limited (for reasons unknown).
FWIW you can't run more than one HE tunnel per real IPv4 address because of the way the 6in4 protocol works. This shouldn't be a limitation for most people.
- aleksmariuszDialled in
Excellent question, you're absolutely right to ask and I really should have included this caveat that it's only a fifth of what i get natively through IPv4.. a simple speedtest on ipv6-test.com reveals ~20Mbps (vs the 100Mbps i normally get via native IPv4):
This speed restriction is likely at the Hurricane Electric tunnelbroker side, as I used iperf to a server i've colocated (on a gigabit line) and got:
$ sudo iperf -V -c 2001:470:1...:....::2 # connecting from server outbound toward home (download speed)
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to 2001:470:1...:5a9::2, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 45.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 3] local 2a03::...:...:8:: port 58704 connected with 2001:470:1...:.....::2 port 5001
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 22.6 MBytes 19.0 Mbits/sec$ sudo iperf -s -V # connecting from server inbound TOWARD home (upload speed)
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 4] local 2a03:....:.....:8:5054:ff:fee9:6bf1 port 5001 connected with 2001:470:1...:.....::2 port 59088
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.2 sec 11.4 MBytes 9.34 Mbits/secSo again definitely not a replacement for Virgin Media getting their IPv6-act together and providing native connectivity, just something to dabble with if you can't wait.
- WiteWulfOn our wavelength
"You can also of course go the simpler route and set up IPv6 connectivity on an individual host basis more easily (H.E gives you up 5 tunnels per account) if you don't need your entire LAN with IPv6 connectivity."
That's not the right way to do it. Different tunnels are meant for different physical locations. Each tunnel provides a /64 by default, but you can also request multiple /48 networks on each tunnel. If you're setting up tunnels on a host by host basis all your LAN traffic (using your delegated prefixes, at least, not locally scoped traffic) will be tromboning through the he.net servers, it'll be awfully slow
- aleksmariuszDialled infair point about the tunnels meant for diff locations.. and as mentioned by others, speed is not going to be anywhere native unfortunately.
- fayzDialled in
Please do post a tutorial, i’ve been trying to get my edgerouter x to use he.net for ipv6
- VMCopperUserWise owl
fayz wrote:Please do post a tutorial, i’ve been trying to get my edgerouter x to use he.net for ipv6
http://community.ui.com would be the better place to ask. If someone else here has the same router using HE then they might be able to help, but I would reach out to the UI help team.
Related Content
- 5 months ago
- 7 months ago
- 8 months ago