Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
On 05/09/2014 17:15, Richard Patterson deton...@helix.net.nz wrote: there's plenty of things that content providers may care about that'll be broken under NAT44 and can be resolved by adopting IPv6. ... Geolocation tracking and/or CDN steering. Access restrictions (Betting sites blocking multiple users behind one IP). You think geolocation is going to be done at a finer resolution than /64 in IPv6? Ditto for access restrictions. Many clients enable privacy addresses by default. Hence if you have a business need to block someone by their network location, you would have no option but to block at least the /64.
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
Neil, I don’t “mistakenly assume” anything. If anyone mistakenly assumes something it is most likely as a result of your content-free emails, where teasing back layers of defensive ego-preening in order to obtain data germane to the subject matter at hand is an arduous chore. What you seem to be saying is ‘these US providers have a larger profit margin and they have wasted this money on IPv6 deployment’. I find it hard to believe they would do this at such detriment of shareholder value. Are you realistically saying Comcast rolled out v6 to as many customers as BT has broadband subscribers (~6m), without a business case for doing so? OK, let’s exclude the US then. Those Americans well known for their callous disregard of profit anyway. DTAG has 26% deployment. Free has 39%. Swisscom 27%. [1] Why are DT or Swisscom doing this where BT isn’t? Is it really the case of Neil McRae standing up and shouting about the emperor’s new clothes? Or is there another factor at play here? Will [1] http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/ - that’s as measured on the network btw, not marketing puff. On 5 Sep 2014, at 20:42, Neil J. McRae n...@domino.org wrote: Will, If anyone has done V6 because of a business case then the hurdles they have must be insane! IPV6 is about being in this business. You mistakenly assume that in the UK we have done nothing which is massively incorrect - and my experiences about brokenness aren't just my own and speaking to many of the companies you mention it hasn't been painless for them nobody should be kidding themselves on that it was. The market in the UK I would argue is unique. Don't know if you remember the question I asked John from Comcast about the price of broadband in the US at the last UKNOF? IPV6 will be here when we need it. Neil Sent from my iPhone On 5 Sep 2014, at 20:31, Will Hargrave w...@harg.net wrote: On 5 Sep 2014, at 18:22, Neil J. McRae n...@domino.org wrote: OK, that’s a bit more of a useful answer :-) So, Neil, why is BT different from Comcast? They need IPV6 because they have no V4 addresses left? You tell me? I¹m not intimately familiar with Comcast¹s platform but at least its DOCSIS, doesn¹t do wholesale as far as I know, those would be pretty decent sized differences also but the key driver for IPV6 is not having enough IPV4 addresses, and at least in Europe that doesn¹t seem to be the case (yet). What I can also tell you is that V6 generated harder things to fix than CGN has done. Quite obvious really, as one controls everything in CGN but one can¹t say the same about controlling other folks V6 networks. When something in the V6 network breaks in my experience its typically dealt with at a slower rate than V4, having dual stack at home I ended up turning it off because a bunch of sites that had V6 broke it and then took along time to fix it, that¹s just not a scenario I want to unleash on the customers I want to serve. Lets not mention the spam that comes through V6 either again because people have done half baked deployments. I think this could be an outdated assessment of the situation. A single data point (your home network) is just the kind of anecdata you yourself would stomp on ;-) OK, Comcast is all DOCSIS (but then so is VM in the UK). We can take a look at ATT, they operate a lot of DSL. VZW and T-Mob are mobile networks, so a whole different kettle of fish. That would seem to throw the access technology used out of the equation. (although the VoLTE/v6 situation is relevant there) So let’s go into address policy. ARIN hasn’t got the same sort of 'run out fairly' model that RIPE NCC has, however their cupboard is not yet bare: http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/. Since ARIN region has the bulk of v4 address space anyway, is v4 space any ‘scarcer’ there than in Europe? It’s difficult to tell. I just find it interesting that these are large access providers using diverse technologies, and those in the US have chosen to make considerable investment in deploying IPv6 to domestic end-users whilst those in the UK have not. I’m not really a v6 evangelist, but I am interested in understanding how the calculation of these business cases differ - the same as deployment of any other technology. (from another mail) For clarity though we have had IPV6 available on BT Internet Connect (business Internet service) for years- take up and demand very low. Traffic volumes don't even register on our graphs. Comcast claim a terabit of v6 edge traffic. I think that’s a fairly frightening amount. Will -- Will Hargrave +44 114 303
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
On 7 Sep 2014, at 11:19, Will Hargrave w...@harg.net wrote: Neil, I don’t “mistakenly assume” anything. If anyone mistakenly assumes something it is most likely as a result of your content-free emails, where teasing back layers of defensive ego-preening in order to obtain data germane to the subject matter at hand is an arduous chore. What you seem to be saying is ‘these US providers have a larger profit margin and they have wasted this money on IPv6 deployment’. I find it hard to believe they would do this at such detriment of shareholder value. Are you realistically saying Comcast rolled out v6 to as many customers as BT has broadband subscribers (~6m), without a business case for doing so? OK, let’s exclude the US then. Those Americans well known for their callous disregard of profit anyway. DTAG has 26% deployment. Free has 39%. Swisscom 27%. [1] Why are DT or Swisscom doing this where BT isn’t? Don’t forget there are a number of big companies who are embracing IPv6 and deploying within their organisations e.g. Continental, BMW, Goldman Sachs, Space.Net. Many organisations can see a business case for IPv6. Scott signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
On 7 Sep 2014, at 11:22, Will Hargrave w...@harg.net wrote: Neil, I don’t “mistakenly assume” anything. If anyone mistakenly assumes something it is most likely as a result of your content-free emails, where teasing back layers of defensive ego-preening in order to obtain data germane to the subject matter at hand is an arduous chore. In that case Will I'll stop wasting any more time on this! How is that for content free now? regards Neil
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
What the chuff. They seriously wanted to charge almost four hundred quid to add an IP block?? Peter Knapp -Original Message- From: uknof [mailto:uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Candler Sent: 07 September 2014 14:06 To: uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk Subject: Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce Incidentally, I recently asked about getting IPv6 added to an existing Easynet 100M office leased line. The account manager said they could, but would charge £395+VAT for doing it. So that idea went by the wayside. Regards, Brian.
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
Many providers do charge fees for any changes.. its not unusual. Options are to either negotiate it now, negotiate it upon renewal or to switch provider I'm sure there's plenty of providers on this list who can offer a bundled service with lower MRC :) Steve On 7 September 2014 14:17, Peter Knapp peter.kn...@ccsleeds.co.uk wrote: What the chuff. They seriously wanted to charge almost four hundred quid to add an IP block?? Peter Knapp -Original Message- From: uknof [mailto:uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Candler Sent: 07 September 2014 14:06 To: uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk Subject: Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce Incidentally, I recently asked about getting IPv6 added to an existing Easynet 100M office leased line. The account manager said they could, but would charge £395+VAT for doing it. So that idea went by the wayside. Regards, Brian.
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
Our new line at work from Exponential-e came with ipv4 and ipv6 subnets as default, nice Martin On Sunday, 7 September 2014, Stephen Wilcox steve.wil...@ixreach.com wrote: Many providers do charge fees for any changes.. its not unusual. Options are to either negotiate it now, negotiate it upon renewal or to switch provider I'm sure there's plenty of providers on this list who can offer a bundled service with lower MRC :) Steve On 7 September 2014 14:17, Peter Knapp peter.kn...@ccsleeds.co.uk javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','peter.kn...@ccsleeds.co.uk'); wrote: What the chuff. They seriously wanted to charge almost four hundred quid to add an IP block?? Peter Knapp -Original Message- From: uknof [mailto:uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','uknof-boun...@lists.uknof.org.uk');] On Behalf Of Brian Candler Sent: 07 September 2014 14:06 To: uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','uknof@lists.uknof.org.uk'); Subject: Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce Incidentally, I recently asked about getting IPv6 added to an existing Easynet 100M office leased line. The account manager said they could, but would charge £395+VAT for doing it. So that idea went by the wayside. Regards, Brian. -- -- Martin Hepworth, CISSP Oxford, UK
[uknof] Sunday night curry?
Is anyone heading for some food somewhere in Belfast? The Safa has been mentioned, but no more than that. Greg Sent from my iPad This e-mail message (including any attachment) is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author only. Furthermore, this message (including any attachment) does not create any legally binding rights or obligations whatsoever, which may only be created by the exchange of hard copy documents signed by a duly authorised representative of Hutchison 3G UK Limited. Hutchison 3G UK Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 3885486. Registered Office Star House, 20 Grenfell Road, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 1EH
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
at $JOB-2 we had an entanet line and I specified IPv6 needed when I placed the order, but it was done afterwards and we were asked to pay a fee, I politely declined and asked Mr Lalonde to kick the right bottom. We had the v6 block pretty quickly, no fee, and were told he specifically didn't want to charge for it so as to encourage uptake!
Re: [uknof] UK IPv6 Taskforce
bottom. We had the v6 block pretty quickly, no fee, and were told he specifically didn't want to charge for it so as to encourage uptake! As they should. There is some good ipv6 content for UKNOF29, strongly suggest those not attending and interested in the topic take the time to watch the webcast for the ipv6 content we have for this meeting. .. and a personal opinion, lets give the UK IPv6 Council a chance before we put up a burning 6UK effigy :) Chris
