I think also DSLite will make more people unhappy than IPv6 make happy, I would rather use tunneling, but VM caps the connection and there is no enough brain-power in VM to resolve the issue.
I agree.. DS-lite will concern me.. while I know I'm on a dynamic address, it's not changed in years.. hell, I even have a dns name pointed at it.. moving to a private address IP4 probably wouldn't be critical, but it would be annoying.
I'm also interested in buying a new router for home, but I can't do that until I know how this will all work so I can make sure my new router will work... I don't even know if my current router will work (this is all with modem mode of course)
CG NAT is coming because of the shortage of IPv4 addresses, not because of IPv6. DS-lite is a sensible solution, because they are rolling out a network stack that will be in use for many years to come, and the shortage gets ever worse.
If they cancelled the IPv6 project tomorrow, it would be immediately replaced with another project implementing some form of CG NAT.
If they cancelled the IPv6 project tomorrow, it would be immediately replaced with another project implementing some form of CG NAT.
yep, I am more than sure, they canceled IPv6 project and will replace just with ipv4 nat when will feel the shortage with an option to buy a public IP. they will even advertise that as a "secure network".
@ksim wrote: yep, I am more than sure, they canceled IPv6 project and will replace just with ipv4 nat when will feel the shortage with an option to buy a public IP. they will even advertise that as a "secure network".
This daft. They've not cancelled the IPv6 project. The trial deployment is on-going with only a small but seemly permanent dip a few months ago.
Deployment of DS-Lite is in a holding pattern. To the best of my knowledge VM aren't in a tight spot for IPv4. They have indicated that deployment is dependent on content providers moving to IPv6. This isn't happening very quickly outside of the big content providers. For example the IPv6 traffic through LINX is tiny even with the huge deployment of IPv6 clients on BT and Sky. There's no compelling business case for them to rush.
If and when VM feel the pinch on IPv4 they can start the deployment for new customers (as suggested on here some months ago). It's a low risk way to start the ball rolling with new customers tied into 12 month contracts and not knowing any better. They'll know from large scale Liberty Global deployments in the rest of the EU what the impact is going to be.
This daft. They've not cancelled the IPv6 project.
okey, they are just moving backward or they stuck in 2017 😉
@Anonymous wrote:
The trial deployment is on-going with only a small but seemly permanent dip a few months ago.
Deployment of DS-Lite is in a holding pattern. To the best of my knowledge VM aren't in a tight spot for IPv4. They have indicated that deployment is dependent on content providers moving to IPv6.
Every major content provider implemented IPv6 years ago. Main internet provider did the same. Even this forum is using IPv6 ;-), VM is the biggest who promised to deliver but wasn't able to, the only things they were able to do is configure a cap for clients who are using tunnels.
@Anonymous wrote:
If and when VM feel the pinch on IPv4 they can start the deployment for new customers (as suggested on here some months ago). It's a low risk way to start the ball rolling with new customers tied into 12 month contracts and not knowing any better. They'll know from large scale Liberty Global deployments in the rest of the EU what the impact is going to be.
The main mistake is thinking is that IPv6 is only needed when a provider has a limited pool of IPv4 addresses, NO, I need it as a client to get rig of NAT for my IoT devices at home. IPv6 brings much more than just addresses, it is faster routing and other things.
@Anonymous wrote: They'll know from large scale Liberty Global deployments in the rest of the EU what the impact is going to be.
Just want to finish with one thing, transition to IPv6 is not noticable for endusers if you do it right, VM as part of LG just can't do it right, and this is why VM is not doing it.
CG NAT is coming because of the shortage of IPv4 addresses, not because of IPv6. .
VM can't be short of IPv4 addresses, they've been telling us for the 8+ years that I've been following this thread that they weren't implementing IPv6 because they had no shortage of IPv4 addresses... *ahem*
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".
@ksim wrote: yep, I am more than sure, they canceled IPv6 project and will replace just with ipv4 nat when will feel the shortage with an option to buy a public IP. they will even advertise that as a "secure network".
This daft. They've not cancelled the IPv6 project. The trial deployment is on-going with only a small but seemly permanent dip a few months ago.
Deployment of DS-Lite is in a holding pattern. To the best of my knowledge VM aren't in a tight spot for IPv4. They have indicated that deployment is dependent on content providers moving to IPv6. This isn't happening very quickly outside of the big content providers. For example the IPv6 traffic through LINX is tiny even with the huge deployment of IPv6 clients on BT and Sky. There's no compelling business case for them to rush.
If and when VM feel the pinch on IPv4 they can start the deployment for new customers (as suggested on here some months ago). It's a low risk way to start the ball rolling with new customers tied into 12 month contracts and not knowing any better. They'll know from large scale Liberty Global deployments in the rest of the EU what the impact is going to be.
Over a year ago Liberty Global was talking about full customer rollout "soon". I think (could be wrong), out of the whole of the EU, 10 of the Countries they operate in are IPv6 enabled, the UK is not. Not sure how many separate companies they have in the EU/how many countries in total they operate in. I am also counting the UK as 1, not 4.
VM has said that their core network is IPv6, that their voice services all run over IPv6. No mention of their Video on Demand services.
A neat little fact is that Liberty Global (who now owns Virgin Media) has been praised highly over the years because they seem to push for IPv6 deployment. For some reason, the UK arm (and, it is now an Arm of Liberty Global) seems to go the other way.
Now.... I know that their IPv6 deployment is not standard. In Ireland if you complain about DS-Lite then they can give you a IPv4 only Config. In Germany I think those who complain about DS-Lite can get full DS services. Some areas seem to complain about using 3rd party routers too.
In regards to the post by ksim... I think they forgot to put in the word "IF", I do not think it intentional of them saying VM had cancelled the IPv6 deployment. (could be wrong).
It shouldn't be about a IPv4 "Pinch"... I think they argued that early on too... This shouldn't be an idea that has to be monetized, and that is sadly what I think is happening. I seen the same thing with Modem cloning in the past, for years and years people were not-not-allowed to clone modems and steal service - sometimes literally killing others sharing the same area connections. There was never a large enough monetary reason for them to combat theft of service. Until customers leave due to this then they'll never care.
And I still see no reason why everyone cant have a IPv4 from Virgin Media...9.5 million IPv4 addresses and 5.9 million home broadband customers.
---- I do not work for VM, but I would. It is just a Job. Most things I say I make up and sometimes it's useful, don't be mean if it's wrong. I would also make websites for them, because the job never seems to require the website to work.
I think we've covered this before but I believe that the UK VM customer base is approx the same as all the other EU LG networks put together. With an adequate supply of IPv4 it's in their interest to approach things here with a greater sense of caution. Don't think they'll be seeking to monetise. That seems like a fools errand costing more to administer than it would bring in (for the time being).
@ksim wrote: Every major content provider implemented IPv6 years ago.
Hmm. Not really. Many like Google, Facebook, LinkedIn and CDNs like Cloudflare, Akamai surely have and reaped the benefits. A great many have not. Twitter, the BBC and many newspapers (Mirror, Sun, Guardian, Telegraph) being easy examples that have yet to make the switch. According to https://whynoipv6.com/ only 350 of the Alexa top 1000 sites are IPv6 enabled.
On my own network my mostly pedestrian web browsing is showing 21% of downstream traffic as IPv6 and 12.9% of upstream. If you exclude my YouTube addiction it's probably the 12.9% number that's more typical.
This is a good spot! They must have turned this on fairly recently. A quick survey of other VM services shows they're still on IPv4-only unfortunately.
