On 3/1/19 3:49 PM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
I would guess that even after 5 years, we still don't have much
v6 deployment into homes and that's a pretty big problem.
That's an interesting statement to make. Do you have evidence of that?
https://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/ shows considerable deployment. I know
for a fact that the AT&T wireline network supports IPv6 to 100% of customers.
The reason only 61.26% of traffic is IPv6 is *not* due to the ISP not supporting
it. It's due to edge networks that don't support. And in this case, it's mostly due
to enterprises not supporting. The 61.26% number is heavily weighted towards mass
market customers using IPv6, because it was easier to push IPv6 support into
managed CE routers.
Oh, that's interesting. I knew it was getting support on mobile, but
haven't kept up on what's going on cable/dsl/fiber.
What I *am* seeing, is a lack of random topology multi-router networks.
While it may be that continued use of IPv4 in home networks is a factor that
drives people away from multi-router topologies, I don't think this is the same
as saying that lack of IPv6 is a reason people aren't deploying.
I really don't think IPv6 (or even IPv6-only inside the mass market LAN --
which won't be happening for a long time) is a driver for multiple routers.
What I meant is that homenet router protocols are v6 only. At least the
last time I checked.
The biggest driver historically has been to get multiple Wi-Fi access points,
to cover more of the premises. But many people resisted even this driver,
because devices didn't seamlessly move between APs and the routed interfaces
blocked multicast traffic (so you could only cast to your TV if you were on the
same AP with the TV).
Yeah, I have that problem with my friends/neighbors.
But Wi-Fi Alliance (WFA) has been working to provide a solution for seamless
whole home coverage. And from what I can see, I think it's going to be
successful. But WFA EasyMesh (release 1) is a tree-topology L2 bridged network.
I do think this needs to move towards true mesh (and the reason they haven't is
because they haven't yet been properly introduced to an easy method of loop
avoidance).
Do you know if they deal with differences in the security domains? Or is
it punted to L3? Like in my example, I might want to let my neighbors
access my hot tub controller, but not, say, my tv. You can envision the
same thing with guest/kids nets.
But even if the common home network won't have lots of routers, the need for a
good naming architecture still exists, IMO.
Yes, and that's not dependent on v6 afaik.
Mike
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
