Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Brian E Carpenter wrote: I notice this because I log IPv6 connectivity. My wife has no idea this is going on. (Why my ISP offers inconsistent IPv6 service is another question, which their help desk cannot answer.) Yeah, I have the same experience. Historically I've had my

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Tim Chown writes: > But the mobile situation is now becoming better, isn’t it? I read that > >50% of the traffic to Facebook from the bigger US mobile operators is > now IPv6. In the UK, we have at least one mobile operator with a > growing deployment of over half a million

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Am 06.03.2017 um 13:48 schrieb Gert Doering: 3G mandated IPv6, no carrier actually deployed it *before* they had a huge legacy of IPv4-only handsets in the field... could have been done from day one. One interesting point here is: Despite the late start of the mobile network people, we

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Hi, On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 02:07:31PM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Mon, 6 Mar 2017, Gert Doering wrote: > > > 3G mandated IPv6, no carrier actually deployed it *before* they had a > > huge legacy of IPv4-only handsets in the field... could have been done > > from day one. > > On

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017, Gert Doering wrote: 3G mandated IPv6, no carrier actually deployed it *before* they had a huge legacy of IPv4-only handsets in the field... could have been done from day one. On the other hand no handset manufacturer apart from Nokia ever made any 3G handsets that

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Hi, On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 01:26:57PM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > The mobile carriers nicely demonstrated how *not* to do it - by ignoring > > the mandate for IPv6 in 3G, and rolling out huge masses of v4-only > > handsets, they suddenly had a huge installed basis of, well, v4-only >

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Am 06.03.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Florian Lohoff: Nevertheless - As an ISP i would never enable IPv6 for Customers without beeing shure that they are aware. While I understand the concerns, since I was in this situation a while ago at $ORKPLACE[-1] (you may remember me from your former employer

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017, Gert Doering wrote: If a CPE has no v6 support, having it available on the DSLAM (in passive mode = do not start IPv6CP until the client initiates it) will not do harm. The issue here isn't devices that do not support IPv6, it's the ones that do support IPv6 when it

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Hi, On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 12:11:53PM +0100, Florian Lohoff wrote: > You cant enable some feature for "Aunt Tilly" without her at least > beeing able to take action. Aunt Tilly has no idea what IPv4, IPv6 or "Internet" is. As long as her web browser will show cat videos, she's happy. If you

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Am 06.03.2017 um 12:11 schrieb Florian Lohoff: Aunt Tilly You are dealing with non technical people. You contradict yourself. Non technical people have no clue about IPv6/IPv4, some of them flood the support(in Germany Unitymedia/UPC, Vodafone)) because their PS-games don't work anymore

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 11:41:54AM +0100, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 11:37:30AM +0100, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > Nevertheless - As an ISP i would never enable IPv6 for Customers > > without beeing shure that they are aware. > > > > - Deploy IPv6 Dualstack from some

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Hi, On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 11:37:30AM +0100, Florian Lohoff wrote: > Nevertheless - As an ISP i would never enable IPv6 for Customers > without beeing shure that they are aware. > > - Deploy IPv6 Dualstack from some point in time and making it clear > in your paperwork. > - Make it an option

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 08:06:02AM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > Hi, > > I just had a discussion with people from an ISP in the process of > implementing IPv6. They were afraid of turning on IPv6 for customers > who had purchased their own routers themselves, because these > routers might

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Hi, On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 08:39:43AM +0100, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: > FreeBSD, at least until 11.0-STABLE: No IPv6 firewall turned on by > default. Which is exactly what I want. Well, "have no services on by default" is good enough for the issue at hand "can my devices protect themselves, or

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

"...because there was a port-forward in the residential gateway..." That's unrelated to the original query that started this thread. A user (or device via UPnP, I suppose) had to have configured that port forward. What happened there has nothing to do with default firewall behavior in SOHO

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Mikael Abrahamsson writes: > Let me put it this way, I have personally found an anon-ftp server with > company confidential documents on it, that was reachable from the > outside without the owners knowledge, because there was a port-forward > in the residential gateway that

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Nick Buraglio wrote: Is this actually a realistic fear? Let me put it this way, I have personally found an anon-ftp server with company confidential documents on it, that was reachable from the outside without the owners knowledge, because there was a port-forward in the

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Is this actually a realistic fear? Let me preface this by saying that I find NAT extremely distasteful, however, the one thing that NAT provides some modicum of advantage from is inbound scans of end systems. With IPv6 this is functionally a non-issue from a shotgun scan perspective. Most devices

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

> De: <ipv6-ops-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel...@lists.cluenet.de> en > nombre de Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> > Organización: People's Front Against WWW > Responder a: <swm...@swm.pp.se> > Fecha: miércoles, 1 de marzo de 2017, 9:13 > Para: JORDI P

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ writes: Hi, > Maybe we need to look into those distributions of BSD/Linux made for > non-techie users, that come with a “build-in” GUI, etc. I doubt those > come with IPv6-enabled by default and the firewall-off, it will be a > mistake, as they

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Bjørn Mork wrote: As an ISP: If you don't manage the CPE, should you even care? That is good question. In Sweden ISPs have gotten in trouble historically for not filtering stuff and customers files were exposed. For instance when ETTH had people plug their computers

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

Mikael Abrahamsson writes: > I just had a discussion with people from an ISP in the process of > implementing IPv6. They were afraid of turning on IPv6 for customers > who had purchased their own routers themselves, because these routers > might not have IPv6 firewalling on by

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

ists.cluenet.de> Asunto: Re: question regarding over the counter devices > > IPv6 firewall non-on by default. I�$,1ryve not seen that myself in any product up to now. > > How many products have you looked at? We're still talking about home > routers now, right?

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

nder a: <swm...@swm.pp.se> Fecha: miércoles, 1 de marzo de 2017, 9:13 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> CC: <ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de> Asunto: Re: question regarding over the counter devices On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > IPv6 firewall

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

> > IPv6 firewall non-on by default. I$,1ry(Bve not seen that myself in any > > product up to now. > > How many products have you looked at? We're still talking about home > routers now, right? I was commenting on "all the IPv6 OSs *for hosts and servers*, have the IPv6 firewall on by

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: IPv6 firewall non-on by default. I’ve not seen that myself in any product up to now. How many products have you looked at? We're still talking about home routers now, right? I just checked Netgear R6100. Factory default has "IPv6 disabled",

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: What I’ve seen, yes is on by default, but I also heard the same complain, but actually never seen a device not-on by default … so I’m not really convinced is very real. "not-on", do you mean "IPv6" or "IPv6 firewalling"? -- Mikael Abrahamsson

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

> However, I believe that all the IPv6 OSs for hosts and servers, have the IPv6 > firewall on by default, so this should not be a big issue, unless you have > other devices with no IPv6 firewall (IP cameras?), which I think is not > common, because those devices (what I$,1ry(Bve seen up to

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

What I’ve seen, yes is on by default, but I also heard the same complain, but actually never seen a device not-on by default … so I’m not really convinced is very real. However, I believe that all the IPv6 OSs for hosts and servers, have the IPv6 firewall on by default, so this should not be a

Re: question regarding over the counter devices

> 1 mars 2017 kl. 08:06 skrev Mikael Abrahamsson : > > > Hi, > > I just had a discussion with people from an ISP in the process of > implementing IPv6. They were afraid of turning on IPv6 for customers who had > purchased their own routers themselves, because these routers