JackOfAll wrote: 
> No! LOL. I was having a conversation last week about IPv6, which started
> from talking about BT having implemented CGNAT, and which UK ISP's are
> actually capable of providing IPv6 to the end user. Andrews and Arnold
> was the name that kept coming up. Until the "large" ISP's provide it,
> (ie. BT, Sky, Virgin), can't see it ever taking off. The conversation
> about IPv4 address space running out has been going on for years and it
> seems that CGNAT is the preferred solution by those who wil/wont drive
> the widescale adoption of IPv6, by the end user.

CGNAT breaks so much stuff it's hard to know where to start. You are now
sharing a worldwide external IP address with a number of other houses.
If a third party site blocks one of them for some reason (valid or not),
all the other houses get blocked too. Then there's all the interactive
stuff like networked games which have a real hard time with it since you
are now dounle NAT'd, one of my friends is implementing the networking
code for Elite Dangerous at Frontier and CGNAT is driving him mad. BT's
model is all you do is browse the web and send/recieve the odd email,
but many people's usage is a lot more complex than that now.

I run a torrent server (legally, and Andrews and Arnold have nothing
against them, nor do they traffic shape or block any ports). Over the
last 6 months the IPv6 traffic to it has picked up, it's now about 10%
of the total. This is mostly from US and German addresses, though I see
some asian ones. The UK is in danger of being left behind, all because
BT, Sky and Virgin refuse to spend money in order to generate more
dividend for shareholders. Money is what this is really about.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Owen Smith's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42371
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101624

_______________________________________________
unix mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix

Reply via email to