We had a similar issue with a client that had a sizeable deployment of MS surface tablets on EE. I’m not sure if this is the same issue you’re having.
When the SIMs were transitioned to IPv6, a dual stack service was not provided - it appeared to use NAT64/DNS64, consequently the devices were unable to build an IPSEC tunnel to a V4 concentrator and the clients employees were unable to access corporate resources remotely. They ended up moving network because EE support could offer no solution or temporary rollback (given the change was made without notice). While I appreciate what EE have deployed is technically valid, NAT64 is not very widely used and therefore likely to encounter issues like this one. For those of you who have deployed DirectAccess before, you will be familiar with similar problems where certain systems and apps just don’t work because they are reliant on incompatible layers of translation. Seems that there was a UKNOF presentation on this previously. While I agree that the premise of running dual-stack is a pain from a network operator perspective, it is also more of a pain when core business functionality is broken and doesn’t do us technology folk any favours. Dan Kitchen Managing Director razorblue | IT Solutions for Business ddi: 0330 122 7143<tel:0330%20122%207143> | t: 0333 344 6 344<tel:03333446344> | w: razorblue.com<https://www.razorblue.com> On 19 Nov 2018, at 01:02, Catalin Dominte <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: WARNING: This e-mail originated from outside the Razorblue Group corporate network Hi Everyone, I am having a bit of a problem with EE at the moment, since they deployed IPv6 in their network (which I think it’s good) I cannot reach certain destinations that are running on IPv4, because they go via IPv6 by default. EE are blaming a certain iPhone software feature, because they default to IPv6 since IOS 12 without offering a way to disable it and they say there is nothing they can do to fix this. Apple has a bit of a blame too, for not allowing users to change APNs which EE said I should do if I want v4 only. Also, when tethering from an apple laptop, seems the specific route is disregarded which is totally against normal routing paradigm and IPv6 default is enforced. However I explained to EE that I don’t want IPv4 only, but I certainly want an option to say what needs to go where, for certain corner case v4 compatibility scenarios, if they are to do this properly. Has anyone had the same experience? Would be curious to see how much IPv6 traffic EE does after the change, compared to IPv4. 😊. Catalin
