Manage-config flag I think was the missing piece of the puzzle for me. Thanks for the info!!!
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Jesse DuPont <[email protected] > wrote: > (Background: all our SM's are bridged). > > For IPoE, we're having to do both SLAAC and DHCPv6-PD towards customers. > SLAAC gives their router a global v6 address on their router's WAN port > (needed if it's originating any v6 traffic such as DNS proxy, NTP, etc., > but no customer LAN traffic is coming from that address whatsoever). We're > also advertising the "managed-config" flag, which tells their router to ask > for a prefix via DHCPv6-PD. Once our router assigns them the prefix, it > installs a route to that prefix (via the customer's WAN link-local address) > and the customer's router installs that prefix on it's LAN with SLAAC. > > For PPPoE, we just configure that same v6 pool for both the "Remote IPv6 > Prefix Pool" (the PPPoE SLAAC equivalent) and the "DHCPv6 PD Pool" > (MikroTik speak). In this scenario, each customer router receives a /64 for > its LAN and a separate /64 for it's WAN. Once prefixes are assigned, v6 > routes are installed by the PPPoE process for each prefix assigned, > pointing to that customer's PPPoE iface. > > Works the same on Cisco (and others, I assume). > > *Jesse DuPont* > > Network Architect > email: [email protected] > Celerity Networks LLC > > Celerity Broadband LLC > Like us! facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc > > Like us! facebook.com/celeritybroadband > On 5/3/16 10:41 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: > > Do you mind if I ask how you're managing v6? How are you allotting > customer blocks/IPs? > > How do you hand off the v6? DHCPv6? SLAAC? > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Jesse DuPont < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> We're 100% dual-stacked, v4/v6. If a customer's router supports v6, >> they'll get a prefix from us. Here are the interesting points: >> >> 1. About 40% of all our customer have a v6 prefix (i.e. at a minimum >> their routers support v6). >> 2. Any router we sell is configured by the installer for v6 (forcing >> the adoption :) ) >> 3. We do graph v4 and v6 separately (at the edge) and about 10-12% of >> all our traffic is consistently v6. Sometimes it jumps up to 20% for a >> while. This holds true for both directions. >> >> To expand on what Dennis said, just because someone gets a v6 prefix, >> doesn't mean they'll have a lot of v6 traffic. It seems while most modern >> mobile phones, tablets and Win 8/10 and Mac OS X (combined with modern >> browsers and apps) readily use v6, most smart TVs/streaming boxes AREN'T >> using v6 yet (I think the new Apple TV might be). So even though Netflix is >> v6 capable, the majority of playing devices aren't so therefore it happens >> over v4. >> >> *Other somewhat interesting, slightly OT v6 stuff:* >> As an experiment, I watched Torch of an iPad streaming a Netflix movie. >> The iPad had both v4 and v6 global. Of course, with any HLS, the player is >> downloading 10s or 20s segments at a time. When it would download the next >> segment it did it with 4 separate TCP substreams (not abnormal), but it >> would switch between v6 and v4, often times using both at the same time. >> One segment would be three v6 substreams and one v4 substream, next time it >> would be 2/2, and so on. Contrast that with Youtube, which on a v6 device, >> will be 100% over v6; same with Facebook. >> >> Separately: I had a customer call in last week; his DirecTV DVR quit >> working consistently (no guide data, couldn't connect) and when it did, it >> would only work for a while, then quit again. Two things were happening: I >> had one v6 DNS server down for a few days. Most everything used the >> secondary DNS server, but not his network. 2nd thing: At that site, I was >> only doing prefix delegation (PD). This meant his router was receiving a >> global v6 prefix and advertising it on his LAN, but wasn't getting a global >> V6 address on it's WAN port (which isn't needed for v6 routing, but could >> be needed if the router is doing DNS proxy using v6 DNS servers, for >> example). Once I let his router's WAN port have a global v6 address along >> with his delegated prefix for the LAN, all was golden again. >> >> *Jesse DuPont* >> >> Network Architect >> email: [email protected] >> Celerity Networks LLC >> >> Celerity Broadband LLC >> Like us! facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc >> >> Like us! facebook.com/celeritybroadband >> On 5/3/16 8:23 AM, Ty Featherling wrote: >> >> I'm curious why my traffic isn't' reflecting this. I'll look into routes >> and make sure it all looks right. On another note; has anyone been >> following this whole Google - Comcast IPv6 kerfluffle? >> >> -Ty >> >> >> >> -Ty >> >> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Mike Hammett < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yeah, I think AWS is the last thing that people really care about *not* >>> on IPv6. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>> >>> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds" < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >>> *To: *[email protected] >>> *Sent: *Tuesday, May 3, 2016 9:11:38 AM >>> >>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DSL Router Recommendations >>> >>> OH REALLY?!? >>> >>> WOW! *whistles" >>> >>> SO NOW I KNOW!!! :O >>> >>> .... *grin* >>> >>> I think one of the last remaining large holdouts is AWS as a whole. >>> (There are parts ipv6 enabled, but it's still a mess.) >>> >>> Other than that, as Service Providers we're probably going to end up >>> having at least a rudimentary CGNAT deployment for a decade if not more, >>> especially for those of us with large/old industrial/banking/healthcare >>> customers... >>> >>> ... For stuff that should have been retired 20 years ago but is CRITICAL >>> to their business, and won't run ipv6. >>> >>> (For a perfect example of old tech still in use, Google "Compaq laptop >>> McLaren" :P ) >>> On May 3, 2016 8:45 AM, "Mike Hammett" < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Traffic going IPv6 will bypass NAT end-to-end. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>> >>> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds" < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >>> *To: * <[email protected]>[email protected] >>> *Sent: *Tuesday, May 3, 2016 8:41:28 AM >>> >>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DSL Router Recommendations >>> >>> To be technical, it's not going to remove NAT on your network for the >>> foreseeable future unless when you add IPV6 that you also give everybody a >>> public IPV4 as well :P >>> >>> Maybe a decade from now we'll be able to ditch NAT :( >>> >>> Yes, there are several v6/v4 and v4/v6 translation mechanisms, but those >>> are really just different types of Network Address Translation, regardless >>> of if they are officially called that or not. >>> >>> (Not that you don't know this Mike, I just don't want the nice people >>> following along with the list to get the wrong information about the ipv6 >>> transition.) >>> On May 3, 2016 8:35 AM, "Mike Hammett" < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Having NAT problems? Having problems tracking down DMCA or subpoena >>>> targets? It's impacting your functionality. >>>> >>>> Moving to IPv6 will also increase performance due to the removal of NAT. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>>> >>>> >>>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> *From: *"Paul McCall" < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >>>> *To: * <[email protected]>[email protected] >>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, May 3, 2016 8:18:33 AM >>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] DSL Router Recommendations >>>> >>>> Seth, >>>> >>>> I think it is pick your battles when you can. Some of use run at 100% >>>> capacity in execution, and we have to carve out additional time to do >>>> whatever the "other" things are. And there are a LOT of those "other" >>>> things for growing companies. >>>> >>>> We all know it's important. But, if it is so easy, then when it's time >>>> to hit it head on as it will being impacting our functionality, we can >>>> "easily" take that time, at that time :) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Af [mailto: <[email protected]>[email protected]] On >>>> Behalf Of Seth Mattinen >>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 12:55 AM >>>> To: <[email protected]>[email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DSL Router Recommendations >>>> >>>> On 5/2/16 11:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: >>>> > Everyone *SHOULD* be caring about IPv6. >>>> > >>>> >>>> Why people running ISPs refuse to or are resistant to learn about >>>> things directly related to the business they claim to be in baffles me. >>>> >>>> ~Seth >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
