Cable ISP and IPv6



  • So, last year I had my ISP deactivate the IPv6 stack of my internet connection because it simply did not continously. And it was definitely the IPv6 stack which was at fault because as soon as I switched to IPv4 on my end, everything worked fine again.

    That's about one and a half year in the past now and today I called them about an unrelated matter (a letter which stated: "Thanks for your recent purchase!" when I had not purchased anything). That's when I thought: Maybe stuff has become better in the mean time?

    Okay, the sales drone I talked to first about the letter could not make heads or tails of the term "IPv6", so she forwarded me to tech support.

    Who flatout stated: "Switching back to IPv6 from IPv4 is impossible!"

    After I blew a gasket (and she put me on hold so she could ask someone knowledgable), she stated that a switchback is possible but I won't get dual stack through DS-Lite, I'd get pure IPv6 with no option to switch back again.

    So, I guess I'll be the one who's holding you all back from the future...


  • SockDev

    @Rhywden said:

    So, I guess I'll be the one who's holding you all back from the future...

    not you, but the fuckwits at the ISP will absolutely be holding up the future.



  • Boy, do they need to school those callcenter guys on their language. They keep managing to push all my buttons.

    I've worked in such a callcenter myself and usually set out to be nice to them because I've been on the receiving end. And then they say stupid stuff and I go Hulk.

    I mean, when I wanted to disable IPv6 because the service was so flakey the agent told me: "Do you really want to stand in the way of the future?" Yeah, that went over as well as can be expected.

    And this gal right now told me when I was incredulous about her first statement about the impossibility of changing back: "Well, you should have considered that when you gave the order!"


  • SockDev

    IPv6 has been a standard for 17 years already; how are we still not fully switched over?



  • Because the idiots who created it didn't make it backwards-compatible. At least not until after years and years of nagging. I mean, what did they think was going to happen?


  • SockDev

    @RaceProUK said:

    IPv6 has been a standard for 17 years already; how are we still not fully switched over?

    because until it makes a positive difference to the profits to upgrade than keep going with the current technology stack (or someone paysz them to) the telcos won't upgrade because that's capitalism.



  • And even then they'd probably rather go Triple-NAT than IPv6.


  • SockDev

    @accalia said:

    because until it makes a positive difference to the profits to upgrade than keep going with the current technology stack (or someone paysz them to) the telcos won't upgrade because that's capitalism.

    Ah yes, capitalism. Holding back progress for the last century or two.


  • SockDev

    @Rhywden said:

    And even then they'd probably rather go Triple-NAT than IPv6.

    if it's cheaper for them, yeah they would.



  • @accalia said:

    the telcos won't upgrade because that's capitalism.

    Also all telcos are incompetent. Any that don't seem it are just better at hiding it.



  • @accalia said:

    because until it makes a positive difference to the profits to upgrade than keep going with the current technology stack

    Strictly it's until not upgrading causes a negative difference on profits or causes churn. It's a subtle difference.


  • SockDev

    @loopback0 said:

    Strictly it's until not upgrading causes a negative difference on profits or causes churn. I

    hmm..... point.



  • @Rhywden said:

    because it simply did not continously.

    You accidentally a word or two there.



  • Indeed, that seems to case.



  • KabelBW by any chance?

    It's still an improvement from the UK where none of the big telcos (no idea on the smaller ones) support IPv6 at all yet. Need to spend money aside, they stockpiled so many IPv4 addresses it's just not a problem they need to deal with any time soon.



  • Nay, Vodafone, formerly KabelDeutschland. Though KabelBW actually is the company I did tech support for.



  • Still, do they even make IPv4-only hardware anymore? What part of the path is missing?



  • I don't really get why you would want your ISP to disable IPv6, assuming you had a proper dual-stack connection. Why not simply configure your system to prefer IPv4 over IPv6 so everything works and services only offered over IPv6 (they're rare but they're there) will also work - if the IPv6 connectivity is working at that moment.



  • I just switched back to this tab because Dicksores showed there was a new post. Turned out it was simply my own post that got processed after I had switched to another tab.

    Thanks Dicksores! I really enjoyed reading my own post!



  • Because I'd have to configure everything in my household to use IPv4 only. And some devices simply don't offer that option.

    Like Android. Or Windows Phone. Or a Playstation.

    Plus, DS-Lite does not really play well with port forwarding.


  • SockDev

    Then put all your devices behind a router; LAN side can be IPv4 while the WAN side is IPv6



  • Right, that makes so much sense when the WAN IPv6 is broken.


  • SockDev

    Well sorry for trying to fucking help.



  • Again, even if I did that, their implementation of DualStack (named DS-Lite) does not play well with port-forwarding, especially when it comes to games.



  • Ugh cable companies. I wish I was in an area served by Hurricane Electric, those guys seem to know what they're doing. They came to a local linux conference a few years ago and did a series of talks on the IPv6 transition. They also offer a great & free tunnel service.

    The last time I tried to use IPv6 from Comcast they still weren't issuing a routable /64, only a /128. :soupnazi.pcap:


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @reverendryan said:

    The last time I tried to use IPv6 from Comcast they still weren't issuing a routable /64, only a /128.

    I've a Comcast residential connection. They've been offering me a /60 for more than a year. (Actually, I have to configure my DHCPv6-PD client to ask for a /60, otherwise they offer a /64) They claim to have started offering /60's to every residential customer like three or six months ago.



  • Interesting, sounds like I'll have to give it another go, then.


  • Impossible Mission Players - A

    Oh hai there!



  • @RaceProUK said:

    IPv6 has been a standard for 17 years already; how are we still not fully switched over?

    Probably for the same reason my 4 year old DSL modem doesn't support IPv6.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @Rhywden said:

    Again, even if I did that, their implementation of DualStack (named DS-Lite)...

    That sucks. Do they lack the globally-routable IPv4 space to do native dual-stack, or are they just being churlish?



  • My AT&T modem's web interface has a tickbox to support IPv6, but it is always disabled. One day I used the Chrome HTML inspector to enable the tickbox. I ticked it, submitted it, and when the page refreshed, it was ticked and disabled, meaning the modem actually accepted the change. I don't actually know if it did anything though.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I mean, what did they think was going to happen?

    They thought it was going to be great!

    Filed under: CADT development model, second-system effect



  • IPv6 addresses are too hard to memorize and I don't want to use it since there's no benefit for me ATM. A lot of my linux servers run like this:

    net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_ipv6 = 1
    net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6 = 1
    sysctl -p
    service network restart



  • @RaceProUK said:

    sorry for trying to fucking help

    Doing It Wrong™. This isn't a help category.



  • @rc4 said:

    IPv6 addresses are too hard to memorize

    How often are you remembering IPv4 addresses?



  • .1 is the router and .5 is the laptop


  • SockDev

    @rc4 said:

    IPv6 addresses are too hard to memorize

    IPv4 loopback: 127.0.0.1
    IPv6 loopback: ::1

    Seems easier to me



  • And for addresses which aren't the default loopback interface?

    It's somewhat :cow2: considering the issue of not needing to memorise an IP address was solved years ago.


  • SockDev

    Well, it's as you say; it doesn't matter, since DNS exists. TBH, even 127.0.0.1 and ::1 don't need to be memorised anyway, since all modern OSes recognise localhost.



    1. Have Google make deal with $BIG_ISP_IN_US to help them transition to IPv6.
    2. Announce that Google Search will only be accessible via IPv6 starting in 2018.
    3. ???
    4. Profit!


  • @loopback0 said:

    the issue of not needing to memorise an IP address was solved years ago.

    What? You mean I can access this forum otherwise than typing 162.243.208.23?



  • Yes. CtrlH and infiniscroll a little.



  • What if multiple websites were hosted at that IP and this forum wasn't the default?



  • Shared host discourse? Is that even possible?



  • The server at 162.243.208.23 could just check the Host: field in the HTTP request and proxy to the actual server, which may or may not be this forum. It could even show a completely different website if the Host: field isn't present, which I have actually experienced with some websites.



  • I know how the Host: header works, but Discourse requires containers and rails, neither of which I've seen a shared host provide (but I don't have much experience with those kinds of hosts anyway).



  • I'm not suggesting a shared host at all, I'm suggesting a proxy.



  • @Rhywden said:

    Again, even if I did that, their implementation of DualStack (named DS-Lite) does not play well with port-forwarding, especially when it comes to games.

    How the hell did you even manage to get a non-'lite' dual-stack connection from KDG in the first place? While I was with them (now I'm no longer in a residence 'on my name', and stuck with the lovely degrading DSL everyone knows) I had to stick with IPv4 only as they do offer IPv4 on request/if configuring the -- Hitron in my case -- modem/router combination to not be a fucking router, but don't bother offering IPv6 on the same fucking connection at the same time.

    This 1&1-branded DTAG (Deutsche Telekom) DSL connection is even worse though as for IPv6 - IPv6 should be available in a proper dual-stack configuration even for these branded ones but I don't feel like going through customer support hell again.



  • @loopback0 said:

    How often are you remembering IPv4 addresses?

    Way too often, in my case...


  • SockDev

    @redwizard said:

    Way too often, in my case...

    So, once?


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.