IPv6 support on Virgin media

---

ksim wrote:

---

jem101 wrote:

I'm not too sure what you are talking about here, your argument seems to be (and correct me if I've misunderstood) that VM should deploy IPv6 right now and if that means doing it via DS-Lite/CGNat then so be it, am I right? OK then you have immediately broken a big swathe of IoT etc. devices that use unsolicited inbound connections. You can't just say that 'they can still communicate directly using the superior end-to-end connectivity which IPv6 allows' because a great deal of cheap devices have no native IPv6 support in the hardware. Maybe you consider those users and devices just unfortunate collateral damage?

You do not understand it. It is already broken as your IoT devices behind NAT right now. are you portmapping every IoT device now? or using UPNP? then your setup is insecure and broken. My setup benefits from IPv6 a lot.

Hang on a minute, my webcam behind an IPv4 only NAT router isn't actually broken is it? Because right here and now I can view it from the outside world, so by definition; it's working not broken - as indeed is all of my home automation system. Do what you want and all of a sudden the webcam (at least) IS broken, why; because it doesn't support IPv6 addressing in hardware. And no I don't use uPnP, since I loath it with a passion for exactly the same reason you do, I make a point of disabling it everywhere I go. So I do indeed manually port map devices. Would IPv6 remove the need for me to do that? Well yes it would except I'd have to get a new webcam - maybe you would like to contribute to the cost?

So your setup benefits from IPv6, good for you, now you probably don't intend to, but you really are coming across as 'well IPv6 will help me a lot so I insist that it be deployed immediately irrespective of what might immediately break for many other users - after all as long as ksim isn't inconvenienced and has an easier life, then that's all that matters!

I haven't see the trial results, I doubt Tim (ravenstar68) has either and probably neither have you so to simply claim that 'nothing was working' and 'they can't set it up', is at best pure speculation or you just making it up to suit your argument that VM is staffed entirely with incompetents. Did it ever occur to you that maybe the trial worked perfectly for what it was designed to do but caused more overall problems for users for little if any gain?

Yeah, it was ok in Ireland, was ok in Europe, and suddenly not ok in the UK. And the most professional team addressed users problems right away. Ha Ha. after the trial VM went silent, I am sure if they decided to go FullDS they would tell that as a reason for the delay. They already proved incompetence, no reason to think about complex plans, then the explanation is simple.

Really; it was OK in Ireland was it - ever had a quick glance at the VM forums over there and the posting from users bitterly complaining about the problems with DS-Lite and asking, and being granted, to move back to IPv4 only? And why might people want to do that, couldn't possibly be due their setups suddenly being broken could it? Do you seriously think that a company the size of VM and its parent LG would publicly announce the results of a trial, especially if it didn't go the way they hoped and announce what their future plans are going to be and reasons for the delay? Because if you really do think that then I'm afraid, you clearly have no clue about how large organisations work and the internal politics at play. 

Yes the explanation probably is simple and the simplest explanation is 'it didn't work'

Incidentally have you seen the size of the subscriber bases for LG's subsidiaries across Europe? Very roughly, the combined size of all of their mainland European and Irish customers isn't too much more than VM's UK operation alone. What you 'might' be able to make work in say Belgium with 1.6 million broadband subscribers doesn't necessarily work in the UK with 5.3 million users and about three times the revenue.

 

How about, and hands up this is only speculation, in other UPC regions maybe they were looking at IPv4 address depletion and DS-Lite was the only quick way to continue to grow the customer base? It is widely believed that VM in the UK has a large pool of available IPv4 addresses and that pressure to 'do something' isn't there. If DS-Lite is causing issues then why blindly press on with doing it in the UK if it isn't immediately necessary. Maybe just row back a bit and consider a better solution (full Dual Stack anyone) even if it takes considerably more time to deploy and is more expensive to do?

full DS doesn't require more time or resources. But have you think even a second that any big company is trying to unify structure to reduce cost. Managing different configurations is painful. Going Full DS for LG only in the UK is a huge waste and not cost-effective, they will never do that, as it requires separate and additional training for the UK staff, support, separate set of documentation. again IPv4 pool is never a reason for IPv6 rollout, there is always CGNat for that issue.

I believe as someone else has stated below, separate support arrangements is a complete red herring - yes it would be slightly beneficial to have identical arrangements for all of it's subsidiary companies but as there is little if any overlap that's not a massively compelling argument. And yes I'm perfectly aware that there are other good reasons to move to IPv6 from v4 not just pool depletion, but purely from a business perspective it really is an important driver.

CGNat is perfectly fine, IF you want to alienate and drive away your more technically-minded users and if you are fully prepared for the explosive increase in calls to customer services complaining of why doesn't my no-name light switch work anymore remotely and why can't I get to xyz website. And as I said above the UK market is much, much bigger than any of the others, the ramifications of breaking existing customer setups are much more impactful 

And what makes you so adamant that VM are going to move to IPv4 CGNAT only?

because it is the only way.

Well unless VM happen to have, say enough spare IPv4 addresses to cover predicted growth for the next five years. Now I don't know if that's true, but you certainly don't know it isn't and absolutely can't say it's the only way!

Unless you are actually a senior member of the company, again it's just speculation or making stuff up to suit your agenda.

I can use logic, if there is no IPv6, you will do CGNAT. kind of simple.

See above, and who is saying that VM aren't going to do IPv6 ever? Just because it's not being done to your timescale and at your convenience doesn't actually mean much. I'd like to see them do IPv6 just as much as you would, I'd just rather it be done 'properly' and not just rushed out to tick a box leaving a trail of disgruntled customers in its wake.

And you think that massive network infrastructure changes are just 'minor'?

Because I've done it (on smaller cases), I have friends in ISPs who've done it. Do you know what is major in the IPv6 rollout? it is staff training, providing new scripts for the support. Equipment is IPv6 compatible unless you are running your network on something from the last century. IPv6 configuration and routing are much simpler.

On the scale of VM? Then I expect that you'll know that when you do a big infrastructure change, regardless of how much planning and testing you do, at the point where you press the big red button, something always breaks. Inevitably it's something relatively minor in the grand scheme of things and usually because nobody other than 'Ted in accounts' even knew that it existed. But to Ted in accounts it's the end of the world! Now you do something which works perfectly for 95% of the customers and they don't even realise it's been done, that 5% on the scale of VM leads to a really bad day all round!

Oh and you'd be surprised just how much equipment from the last century is still knocking about. Not core networking equipment no (well at least I'd hope not) but CPE and edge devices. There's no point just thinking about the core infrastructure, it's not about how easy it is to deploy IPv6, it's what experience do the end customers get - because there's no point extolling the many advantages (and I really do know what they are) of the shiny new networking to users complaining when their light switches stop working! Because they'll be coming for you with pitchforks and burning torches!

---