Comments on: UPD ISPs React to the Dangers of Adopting IPv4 Internet Address Sharing

By: cyclope

cyclope — Fri, 03 May 2013 13:39:35 +0000

Bt retail are rolling out a CGN piot and customers have to opt out if they don’t wan’t CGN, The whole thing about CGN to me is a sign that the big isp’s only care about profits and are treating customers like sheep ,

By: cyclope

cyclope — Fri, 03 May 2013 13:34:30 +0000

Isp’s don’t have to supply a router to their customers,and i for one won’t use the bricks they supply as they are usually cheap / poor quality They only provide a router because it saves having trained staff on their tech support,Not that being able to give support to most 3rd party routers would be a difficult task,

What i have never understood fully is why they all don’t provide all customers with their own static ip, like the smaller and business grade isp’s do, My current router supports IPv6 on another note i personally can’t see many isp’s running out of IPv4 addresses any time soon, as customers leave isp’s as well as join them,so their old IP’s can be re used,

By: Peter Drinnan

Peter Drinnan — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 01:05:20 +0000

I am finding more and more IPS are reluctant to provide dedicated IPs, even when your plan is supposed to include them. Recently I was told that needing an IP address for a custom A record was not a valid reason to have one. Is this the future?

By: Neil McRae

Neil McRae — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:47:14 +0000

CPE is still a real issue. Even the ones that do support V6 are very poor.

But the issue isn’t the access network – the issue is all the services that are IPV4 only, which is the VAST MAJORITY! Of course Alex is going to say everyone should have an IP address – thats what the RIPE NCCs core business is! but the reality is that most users use NAT already and it works perfectly well, its also reduces security issues for those users.

At some point in time every ISP will have to deploy CG-NAT. IPV4 is going to be around for another ten years at least, people still play Xbox games and PS2 games online!

Even the latest Nintendo console Wii-U doesn’t support IPV6 and it was launched last month!

You see Adrian’s comment about offering IPV6 for ten years, there are loads of ISPs that have done this but nobody is queuing at the door for it – why – because most of the apps are still on IPV4.

Not being able to offer an IPV4 service to new customers would be a strategic error, and even whilst phones support it, tons of apps on the phones don’t support V6!

Cheers,
Neil.

By: Andrew Bower

Andrew Bower — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:58:42 +0000

Why would they have to do that all at once? And that’s just the ones that supply CPE. Even just making service available for customers who ask or providing with new CPE for new customers or when replacing broken equipment would be a very welcome improvement on the current situation of ‘we won’t tell you what we are doing when and anyway we are fine because we have lots of legacy addresses left’

I agree NAT64/DNS64 would be a good trial to run with native IPv6.

By: Mark Jones

Mark Jones — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:39:59 +0000

One of the problem for ISP’s is replacing legacy CPE’s. The bean counters will yell “NO” or “DELAY” to replacing over a million CPE’s at a wholesale cost of approx £15 – £20 a router plus additional delivery and support costs…

I’m surprised that PlusNet didnt trial ipv6-nat-pt?

By: Olivier

Olivier — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:28:52 +0000

I guess the market will decide between those ISPs with v6 and those with CGN.
The IPv6 CPE shortage was true a few years ago but we are starting to see many low cost IPv6 compatible CPEs enter the market. Plus most new mobile phones are IPv6 compatible. To implement CGN would be a serious strategic error indeed.

By: zemadeiran

zemadeiran — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:52:01 +0000

Good point,

Also a while back in the news was the DSS’s 16 million ip’s doing nothing…

Surely ripe can do something???