My experience has actually been that if I can likely determine the cause BEFORE they speak to a representative and I can play a message informing them "We have noticed your equipment may have lost power, please check the power to your equipment before continuing", my customer satisfaction actually goes up.
I wouldn't suggest playing it for everyone, just those where you have seen that last gap. Shane On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 2:04 PM Josh Luthman <[email protected]> wrote: > I may do that. I haven't gotten to the point where I want to. > > Imagine your parents or grandparents call in wanting to speak to an agent > only to end up listening to a recording. That's frustrating for the end > user. Like when you call any 800 number and it starts giving you options > and wanting you to provide information to talk to the right department who > of course answers only to transfer you to a different department. > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2025, 1:53 PM Shane Ronan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Wouldn't it make sense to then play a message for those users before they >> even connect to a representative to check the power to their equipment? >> >> On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 1:41 PM Josh Luthman via NANOG < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Because we would get things like "why is my IP address super long, I >>> can't >>> play Xbox now" or "my computer says it is IPv6 enabled, does that mean >>> someone hacked me?" >>> >>> I manage the entire thing and let me give you an example of a ticket from >>> this morning. The customer called in and said they unplugged some things >>> and moved stuff around the house. Since then their internet/phone >>> (landline) has not been working. CSR asked if device was plugged in to >>> power. It was not. Customer plugged it in. >>> >>> You have to realize the people we're dealing with on this topic. We get >>> the calls for anything internet related at all because people don't use >>> their brain to connect the situation of unplugging the internet company's >>> box from power and it not working. I wrote a script that takes all >>> incoming calls and scans the customer's device to see if it has dying >>> gasp >>> and then posts to Slack. That post comes up for 20% of our calls - >>> people >>> without power or unplugging it. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 1:35 PM Tom Beecher <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > I did. I'm looking at it from the perspective of managing tier 1 >>> customer >>> >> support issues through the tick box of enable IPv6 and managing their >>> >> subnets. Implementation for me doesn't stop once it's enabled on the >>> >> router. >>> > >>> > >>> > Not picking on you specifically here, but it's generally funny to hear >>> > "none of my users ask for V6" , then "my support will be run over with >>> V6 >>> > setup questions". :) >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 3:09 PM Josh Luthman < >>> [email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> >Read my entire message please. That statement was speaking to the >>> >> implementation issues. >>> >> >>> >> I did. I'm looking at it from the perspective of managing tier 1 >>> >> customer support issues through the tick box of enable IPv6 and >>> managing >>> >> their subnets. Implementation for me doesn't stop once it's enabled >>> on the >>> >> router. >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:48 PM Tom Beecher <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> That's absolutely not true. Tier 1 support will have to deal with v6 >>> >>>> issues. Customers will have additional issues due to IPv6. >>> Absolutely >>> >>>> more than a v4 only network (today, not speaking for the future). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read my entire message please. That statement was speaking to the >>> >>> implementation issues. >>> >>> >>> >>> I addressed (separately) the support aspects. Are there cases where >>> v6 >>> >>> specifically causes customer issues? Yes. Are those cases >>> exceedingly rare >>> >>> these days? Yes. While things happen, the vast majority of user >>> facing >>> >>> stuff these days follows Happy Eyeballs pretty good, and Just Works >>> when >>> >>> you have both 4 and 6 available. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:28 PM Josh Luthman via NANOG < >>> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> >Yes there can be some things to shake out to implement it, but once >>> >>>> those >>> >>>> are done, they're done. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> That's absolutely not true. Tier 1 support will have to deal with >>> v6 >>> >>>> issues. Customers will have additional issues due to IPv6. >>> Absolutely >>> >>>> more than a v4 only network (today, not speaking for the future). >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >What are your end users talking to that is IPv4-only these days, >>> >>>> because >>> >>>> it’s not much pretty much all the e-mail/cloud/office/docs things >>> are >>> >>>> IPv6 >>> >>>> these days, and yeah it’s harder to remember 2620:fe::fe than >>> 9.9.9.9 >>> >>>> but >>> >>>> who besides a few of us still have phone numbers memorized either >>> these >>> >>>> days? >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Little websites named after a forest and an auction website for old >>> junk >>> >>>> (Amazon and Ebay). >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:23 PM Jared Mauch via NANOG < >>> >>>> [email protected]> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > > On Dec 1, 2025, at 2:06 PM, Tom Beecher via NANOG < >>> >>>> [email protected]> >>> >>>> > wrote: >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> > >>> this thread has done nothing except rehash the same viewpoints >>> >>>> that get >>> >>>> > >> discussed ad nauseam for the last however many years. >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> > >> I'm not sure if you just don't see it or you're being funny. >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > It's a correct statement. >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > "IPv6 doesn't work" : Google's stats show that just shy of 50% >>> of >>> >>>> all >>> >>>> > their >>> >>>> > > traffic is native V6. Most of the largest CDNs will give you >>> similar >>> >>>> > > answers. Yes there can be some things to shake out to implement >>> it, >>> >>>> but >>> >>>> > > once those are done, they're done. >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > "My customers don't ask for it." : Customers don't ask for IPv4. >>> >>>> They >>> >>>> > don't >>> >>>> > > ask for NAT/CGNAT either. But you do those things I'm sure, >>> because >>> >>>> as >>> >>>> > you >>> >>>> > > said, they just want things to work. >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > The answer is really money. You made a business decision not to >>> >>>> incur the >>> >>>> > > hardware/software/support costs to implement V6 for your >>> customers. >>> >>>> > That's >>> >>>> > > fine, no shame in that. Maybe that will never be a problem for >>> you, >>> >>>> > maybe >>> >>>> > > someday it will and it will cost you. Who knows. >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > But just be honest and call it what it is, instead of half baked >>> >>>> > statements >>> >>>> > > that have been repeated for decades. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Exactly. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Talking to friends at companies that do social networking stuff >>> pretty >>> >>>> > much all their traffic (over 90%) is from mobile devices, and >>> when I >>> >>>> look >>> >>>> > at the big 3 mobile networks in the US they all do IPv6. Their >>> MVNO’s >>> >>>> > might vary, but the main networks do IPv6. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > I find myself having to tether off their networks when I’m on IPv4 >>> >>>> only >>> >>>> > networks to access things like my hypervisors and other assets >>> that >>> >>>> are >>> >>>> > IPv6-only because they have superior networking these days. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > If you are doing IPv4-only, you are only harming yourself >>> long-term. >>> >>>> The >>> >>>> > solutions are there for all the things you think you will >>> encounter. >>> >>>> For >>> >>>> > the most part it’s 96 more bits, no magic. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Yes there are a few nuances to be aware of, like proxy-arp saves a >>> >>>> lot of >>> >>>> > people when they do kinky things in IPv4 and proxy-NDP is there, >>> but >>> >>>> not in >>> >>>> > the same way on many platforms. One of the last big hurdles out >>> >>>> there was >>> >>>> > IPv6 support for VTEP in FRR in my mind and that gap was recently >>> >>>> closed. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > I also happen to think that Apple got it wrong when they rolled >>> >>>> private >>> >>>> > relay out, they kept the inbound tunnel protocol to outbound proxy >>> >>>> behavior >>> >>>> > on the same address family when they could have upgraded it on the >>> >>>> outbound >>> >>>> > side to IPv6 which would have closed the gap even more. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > What are your end users talking to that is IPv4-only these days, >>> >>>> because >>> >>>> > it’s not much pretty much all the e-mail/cloud/office/docs things >>> are >>> >>>> IPv6 >>> >>>> > these days, and yeah it’s harder to remember 2620:fe::fe than >>> 9.9.9.9 >>> >>>> but >>> >>>> > who besides a few of us still have phone numbers memorized either >>> >>>> these >>> >>>> > days? >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Do you need a ton of IPv4 space? Not really, but if you’re a >>> cable >>> >>>> > company like RCN, yeah you’re not doing any upgrades, but if you >>> are >>> >>>> > leaving assets on IPv4 just because you are leaving them on IPv4, >>> >>>> then at >>> >>>> > some point you are just wasting money. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Send it to me and Tom so we can buy more hockey tickets. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > - Jared >>> >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>> >>>> > NANOG mailing list >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> >>> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/NMBYWMNZ7ROM6WMGFJ7IAYLKPFQG3BUO/ >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>> NANOG mailing list >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/5M7ANDNUNQRIODBM5B6IGSH3P4XPSBYJ/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NANOG mailing list >>> >>> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JW5R7VO75I5RN4B4H2F4GF7NBMXRHH7E/ >> >> _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZB4VVBV62GFMWTTAM6EKFLYDA4HFWIZM/
