IPv6 support on Virgin media

[dgcarter]

Does anyone know whether (and if so when) Virgin plan to implement IPv6 on its network?

[jamesmacwhite]

---

@ChrisJenkins wrote:

Ah, that was probably my mistake. When I have a moment I will try again. If only I could figure out how to configure my router to allow my network to route out over the VM IPv6 stuff then I'd happily generate some traffic 🙂

---

I think that will be it. The suspected management network prefix doesn't seem to be publicly routed, you can't actually traceroute to it outside of VM. The other prefix you can, if you picked a random address within the prefix, say 2a02:88fd:18:a::1 (your prefix will vary from this) which is often commonly used by a router/gateway device) it's routable and can routed to outside of VM on other IPv6 networks, so that's the prefix you need to assign an address under.

In terms of generating traffic, iperf3, curl download test using IPv6 as tests to confirm the traffic is going through VM are good tests. Using it, without prefix delegation you won't be able to really deploy it across a LAN, unless you decided to commit IPv6 sin and NAT6 (which I shamefully do, but because of multihoming), so you just have all IPv6 go through the single v6 address configured on the WAN. Someone more cleverer than me can probably figure out a way you can technically create a unofficial prefix for use across a LAN but at this point it's probably getting too far! It is after all not really official and I'd suspect VM could prevent the RAs from being visible if they find out people are doing things (not that you are really breaking anything). It isn't exactly a secret at this point, but they maybe don't want people just assigning themselves v6 addresses for giggles. However, if they were that concerned don't have a RA with the managed flag hiding on the WAN side then!

[mrjeeves]

Using IPv6 in Bridged mode allows me to see the RAs, but when assigning myself an IPv6 address within the subnet given by the RA packets (2a02:88fd:7:7::/64) results in no connection to any IP address I've tried.

I get the RA packets via tcpdump fine, and have set ra_accept to 2, but, for some reason, packets don't get routed whatsoever.

I plan to stick my laptop directly on the WAN later to try and see if that will work. Any tips in the meantime?

This is my routing table: https://u.davwheat.dev/vmipv6_routing1.txt
And my TCP dump: https://u.davwheat.dev/vmipv6_tcpdump_ra1.png

[Zach_R]

Hi @mrjeeves,

Thank you for your post and welcome back to our community forums. We're here to help.
 

May I ask what issues you're currently experiencing with your broadband connection, if any?
 

Thanks,
 

[jamesmacwhite]

---

@Zach_R wrote:

Hi @mrjeeves,

Thank you for your post and welcome back to our community forums. We're here to help.
 

May I ask what issues you're currently experiencing with your broadband connection, if any?
 

Thanks,
 

---

Don't mind us, we are just tapping into the unofficial IPv6 support on the network.

Although an official update on when we might see IPv6 officially deployed would be nice if you have the time!

[VMCopperUser]

---

@jamesmacwhite wrote:

---

@Zach_R wrote:

Hi @mrjeeves,

Thank you for your post and welcome back to our community forums. We're here to help.
 

May I ask what issues you're currently experiencing with your broadband connection, if any?
 

Thanks,
 

---

Don't mind us, we are just tapping into the unofficial IPv6 support on the network.

Although an official update on when we might see IPv6 officially deployed would be nice if you have the time!

---

I can see it now.

What's IPv6?

Diagnostic software tree will suggest.

Reboot, Try another Browser, Update your software, check for drivers, run a Virus or Malware test, and of course the big clincher --- Try again later as it should resolve itself in 24 hours.

[mrjeeves]

---

@jamesmacwhite wrote:

Don't mind us, we are just tapping into the unofficial IPv6 support on the network.

Although an official update on when we might see IPv6 officially deployed would be nice if you have the time!

---

Or at least trying in my case! 🙈

Still can't get replies to any form of traffic on IPv6 on either of the subnets, annoyingly. Noooo clue what's going wrong. Any chance you could send me your IPv6 routing table so I can compare? 😂

[WiteWulf]

Zach, with the greatest of respect, why are you bothering in a thread that’s been running for eleven years and 127 pages, and is entirely community supported? 🙂

It’s good of you to take an interest, but unless you can offer some concrete information on Virgin’s IPv6 plans I don’t see the point in this. Do you have a quota of support forum posts to meet each week?

[andrewducker]

Sounds like you need some technical support!

[WiteWulf]

Well, if anyone knows how to unstick a piston on a Hope C2 brake calliper I’d be grateful for the help!

[jamesmacwhite]

---

@mrjeeves wrote:

---

@jamesmacwhite wrote:

Don't mind us, we are just tapping into the unofficial IPv6 support on the network.

Although an official update on when we might see IPv6 officially deployed would be nice if you have the time!

---

Or at least trying in my case! 🙈

Still can't get replies to any form of traffic on IPv6 on either of the subnets, annoyingly. Noooo clue what's going wrong. Any chance you could send me your IPv6 routing table so I can compare? 😂

---

Sorry, never replied! Interesting, that in your routing table you don't have what we believe to be a VM management network or some internal subnet. Pinging an address within it says "destination unreachable" outside of VM I believe. You can't assign yourself an IPv6 address in this range as it will give you "administratively denied" responses, but it might need to be in the routing table still to work.

In your case based on the RA output the prefix for the internal subnet is: 2a02:8800:f000:704::/64. This doesn't seem to present in the routing table. When I tested it, this was added, along with the other prefix (which is publicly routed).

Beyond that, I can't really offer much more support I'm afraid. While there are RAs present, it's still missing most of the fundamentals for a proper IPv6 deployment. The being able to manually assign yourself an address part is just a bit of an accident I think. It is also entirely possible they've put a stop to it after it was posted on Twitter and a couple of forums (including here). Maybe the engineers saw the random IPv6 traffic suddenly coming from random places.

Although anyone that does get it working for curiosity, enjoy your hall of fame moment on the APNIC stats for IPv6 usage ha ha.