Found this one: http://speedtest-ipv6-1.upc.nl/ These are my
results.
Hello All,
Found this one: http://speedtest-ipv6-1.upc.nl/
Found this one: http://speedtest-ipv6-1.upc.nl/ These are my results.
OK. In Russia in Saratov city, I have up Speedtest on DualStack. Any
user can open a site http://speedtest.net
Find count Russia, then city Saratov and select server JSC Volgatranstelecom.
If user have IPv6 connectivity, test will do by IPv6.
Or you can try to Enter http://speed.vtt.net test should do by IPv6.
This is speedtest mini.
Found this one: http://speedtest-ipv6-1.upc.nl/
Thanks for the link! Here's my results..
Last Result:
Download Speed: 29620 kbps (3702.5 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 5209 kbps (651.1 KB/sec transfer rate)
Latency: 110 ms
Jitter: 2 ms
Saturday, May 10, 2014 7:39:29 AM
Looks like it's right on the money, even for being across the pond!
I got nearly the same download speed as for IPv4.
I think that's a fair value for a free service, isn't it?
I think that's a fair value for a free service, isn't it?
True and I am not complaining. I just wonder where the bottleneck is.
It is not a given that it is the tunnel provider. It could be
something on my end...
Last Result:
Download Speed: 29620 kbps (3702.5 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 5209 kbps (651.1 KB/sec transfer rate)
Latency: 110 ms
Jitter: 2 ms
Saturday, May 10, 2014 7:39:29 AM
Looks like it's right on the money, even for being across the pond!
The latency is much bigger than yours though!
Yes, anyone can, but it is of no use if one does not have "infinite" upload speed.
Find count Russia, then city Saratov and select server JSC Volgatranstelecom.
I can't find it....
If user have IPv6 connectivity, test will do by IPv6.
Nice.
Or you can try to Enter http://speed.vtt.net test should do by IPv6. This is speedtest mini.
2.29 Mbps down, 2.02 Mbps up. Obviously what it measutres is the upload speed of your
server, not my download speed...
True and I am not complaining. I just wonder where the bottleneck
is. It is not a given that it is the tunnel provider. It could be
something on my end...
Possibly using XP (which doesn't fully support it)
or your WRT54GL that didn't originally support it until you flashed it with new firmware? Just wondering if it may be a hardware/software
thing that was never really intended to support IPV6.
My test here was done from my Windows 7 machine with an Asus-AC68R
router using Merlin's firmware (which includes a built in IPV6
firewall, I believe, over the stock firmware that indeed supports
IPV6, but unless Asus accepted those modifications by Merlin, never originally or currently includes an IPV6 firewall).
Possibly using XP (which doesn't fully support it)
Possibly. However I ran the same test on Rosa's machine. That is also
an XP machine, but somewhat less powerfull. The big difference is that Rosa's machine has IPv6 through the he.net tunnel. And you know what?
One Rosa's machine I get 16.5 Mbps down. Twice as much as on my own (SixXs) machine.
When I get a round tuit, I will unmothball my laptop. That runs Win 7.
Find count Russia, then city Saratov and select server JSC
Volgatranstelecom.
I can't find it....
I've done screen shot https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17838968/Speedtest_Saratov_Russian .png
Possibly using XP (which doesn't fully support it)
Possibly. However I ran the same test on Rosa's machine. That is
also an XP machine, but somewhat less powerfull. The big
difference is that Rosa's machine has IPv6 through the he.net
tunnel. And you know what? One Rosa's machine I get 16.5 Mbps
down. Twice as much as on my own (SixXs) machine.
Ah. I, too, have IPV6 through he.net. Maybe SixXs is having issues
lately possibly even stemming from and continued on from the issues
Bj”rn was having with his connectivity?
I do not think this is a temporary issue. I have run other IPv6 speed
test in the past and the results were always way below my IPv4 speed.
http://ipv6-test.com/speedtest/
It is a bit difficult to compare because my ISP upped my IPv4 speed
from 20/2 to 30/3 earlier this month.
I just ran another test,I disabled my SixXs tunnel, so that my main machine also uses the he.net tunnel. Then I get the same rusult as
with Rosa's machine on the he.net tunnel.
So maybe the NEXT bottleneck is my WRT54GL that limits the speed via
the he.net tunnel at 15 - 16 Mbps, but for the SixXs tunnel it is not
the bottleneck and neither is Xp.
Maybe it is Aiccu. Maybe is is something further down the line.
http://ipv6-test.com/speedtest/
That site didn't give me good results.
Though I'm a cable customer, so it could be congested at the moment.
At that site my IPv6 score is half of what my IPv4 one is. Then again, that site doesn't show latency or anything like that either, so who
knows.
It is a bit difficult to compare because my ISP upped my IPv4
speed from 20/2 to 30/3 earlier this month.
Well, that was nice of them anyways. I pay extra for a 30/5
connection. I don't even know what the normal hookup is, maybe 1.5/512
or something?
I just ran another test,I disabled my SixXs tunnel, so that my
main machine also uses the he.net tunnel. Then I get the same
rusult as with Rosa's machine on the he.net tunnel.
So maybe the NEXT bottleneck is my WRT54GL that limits the speed
via the he.net tunnel at 15 - 16 Mbps,
but for the SixXs tunnel it is not the bottleneck and neither is Xp.
You have entirely too much stuff going on over there. :)
Maybe it is Aiccu. Maybe is is something further down the line.
Being a residential customer, you'll probably never know the real
reason for it, either. Here you can call them and ask,
but most of the normal customer service people have no clue what
you're talking about, so they direct you to "tier 3 support". Most of
them think they know way more than you, so don't tell you what they
don't think you need to know. :|
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Nicholas Boel <=-
On Saturday May 10 2014 20:19, you wrote to me:
When that happens my (actually my ISP's) good old faithful Motorola SBV5120E will have to make room for a DOCSIS 3.0 modem. It is almost certain my ISP will give me a modem with build in router. I may or may not like what I get, but investing now in a new router that probably
will only be used for another 6 to 18 month, is not on top of my list
of options.
The best help desk is the one you never need....
When that happens my (actually my ISP's) good old faithful
Motorola SBV5120E will have to make room for a DOCSIS 3.0 modem.
It is almost certain my ISP will give me a modem with build in
router. I may or may not like what I get, but investing now in a
new router that probably will only be used for another 6 to 18
month, is not on top of my list of options.
Doesn't your ISP offer the option of you purchasing your own modem and deduct the monthly lease fee?
I did that when I got my new service. I went out and purchased my own DOCSIS 3.0 for $70 and they don't charge me the $7/month lease fee. I purchased the SB6141. Works great and the ROI was 10 months!!
I went out and purchased my own DOCSIS 3.0 for $70
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-
On Sunday May 11 2014 11:33, you wrote to me:
When that happens my (actually my ISP's) good old faithful
Motorola SBV5120E will have to make room for a DOCSIS 3.0 modem.
It is almost certain my ISP will give me a modem with build in
router. I may or may not like what I get, but investing now in a
new router that probably will only be used for another 6 to 18
month, is not on top of my list of options.
Doesn't your ISP offer the option of you purchasing your own modem and deduct the monthly lease fee?
No, the cable ISPs don't lease out the modems, they are given on loan. There is no monthly fee, so nothing to deduct if you get your own. This way they ensure that the modems used by their clients are compatible
with their network. If the contract is terminated, the modem should be
returned and when you fail, they send you a bill. That is the theory.
In practise the used modems have so litttle residual value that they never claim it back and ask you to dispose of it yourself, or keep it
if you want.
I did that when I got my new service. I went out and purchased my own DOCSIS 3.0 for $70 and they don't charge me the $7/month lease fee. I purchased the SB6141. Works great and the ROI was 10 months!!
That would have been my choice as well, had it been offered.
In practise the used modems have so litttle residual value that they
never claim it back and ask you to dispose of it yourself, or keep
it if you want.
Over here if it has their name on it, residual value means squat and they'll force you to pay what they want you to pay. I just handed in
all my old stuff so I wouldn't have to go through all the BS.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-
Sunday May 11 2014 19:55, I wrote to you:
I went out and purchased my own DOCSIS 3.0 for $70
So your modem is ready for IPv6. How about your ISP? Have they
announced any plans? And what about yourself? I see that your binkp server is Irex. I have given up hope that it will ever do IPv6 and
dumped it for binkd.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-
On Sunday May 11 2014 16:53, you wrote to me:
But we are drifting from the subject.
How is your IPv6 connection?
Yes it is but I'm not too sure about Comcast being ready. It's really not important to me as of now but I know it is coming. Regarding Irex, I am in the process of updating to D'Bridge as soon as I can put time into getting things configured. I'm pretty sure that can handle IPv6.
Joe Delahaye wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-
Re: Re: UPC IPv6 speed test
By: Bill McGarrity to Michiel van der Vlist on Sun May 11 2014
18:13:00
Yes it is but I'm not too sure about Comcast being ready. It's really not important to me as of now but I know it is coming. Regarding Irex, I am in the process of updating to D'Bridge as soon as I can put time into getting things configured. I'm pretty sure that can handle IPv6.
DB is not yet ready for IPv6 I think that Nick is planning to
implement that, probably for the next major version release. Not sure though
Yes it is but I'm not too sure about Comcast being ready. It's really
not important to me as of now but I know it is coming. Regarding
Irex, I am in the process of updating to D'Bridge as soon as I can put time into getting things configured. I'm pretty sure that can handle
IPv6.
How is your IPv6 connection?
I haven't even looked into it and I really don't know if Comcast
offers it yet.
Comcast's IPv6 deployment continues to expand, over 25% of our customers
are actively provisioned with native dual stack broadband! The
following areas of the Comcast broadband footprint are now fully IPv6 enabled - Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, Kansas, Missouri, Maryland,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Houston.
As I said, as soon as I have some time I find out and go from there.
I'm not that familiar with IPv6 so it's unchartered territory... :)
D'Bridge itself is not IPv6 aware. However, since it uses binkd to provide BinkP support, it follows that a D'Bridge system should
support IPv6,
given proper setup of a native IPv6 connection or an IPv6 tunnel.
In theory, a virtual modem package that supports IPv6 would allow for mailer-over-telnet via IPv6 as well.
Comcast is one of the forerunners in Northern America. They have a web page dedicated to it: http://www.comcast6.net/
That is just theory. There is no IPv6 aware virtual modem package yet, and it is doubtful there ever will.
Ahhh... ok. I didn't really know one way or the other... but I did upgrade IRex to 2.31 I still have to do testing with the FD nodelist to see if it will now read it properly. According to the history notes that part was upgraded so I won't have to route all my netmail through Janis. :)
That is just theory. There is no IPv6 aware virtual modem package
yet, and it is doubtful there ever will.
Mike of PCM will make NetSerial Ipv6 compatible hi told me.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-
Monday May 12 2014 10:39, I wrote to you:
Comcast is one of the forerunners in Northern America. They have a web page dedicated to it: http://www.comcast6.net/
It would appear that for Comcast customers that page does more than
just give general information. When I approach it from an IPv4 only machine it tells me:
"You need to be on the Comcast Cable Network to check for IPv6 status.
Whe I approach it via my SIxXs tunnel it says:
"Your IPv6 address seems to be an address from non-Comcast space. If
you have a v6 tunnel turned up please shut down your v6 tunnel and come back again."
That of course triggers my curiosity. So please go to that page and
tell us what it says you about your IPv6 status...
I stopped bt the url you suggested and low and behold..
Your IP address is 174.57.205.118 Your CMTS is ready for IPv6.
As I said, it's not soemthing that's at the top of my list right
now... but I know it will be needed one day.
Thanks for the info!!
On Monday May 12 2014 12:04, you wrote to me:
That is what you told me two years ago. I am not holding my breath.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bill McGarrity <=-
On Monday May 12 2014 09:00, you wrote to me:
I stopped bt the url you suggested and low and behold..
Your IP address is 174.57.205.118 Your CMTS is ready for IPv6.
CMTS = Cable Modem Termination System. Their end of the pipe.
So they say they are ready for IPv6. Your SB6141 should also be ready.
So my guess is that:
1) It is your router that is not IPv6 ready
Or
2) Your computer is not IPv6 ready. All windows versions from XP up are IPv6 ready, but for XP you must enable it.
What happens if you open up a command window and type: "ipconfig" ?
As I said, it's not soemthing that's at the top of my list right
now... but I know it will be needed one day.
You don't know what you are missing...
Thanks for the info!!
You'r welcome.
Any customer upgrading their network to be IPv6-compliant will not encounter any issues with NetSerial, as IPv4 connectivity will still
be needed for many other devices and software on the network.
While the updating to a IPv6-based network is mandated or needed in
some cases, these networks will be required to also support IPv4 for
the foreseeable future.
Therefore, PC Micro will not be incorporating direct support for connecting to network endpoints using IPv6 addresses this year and has decided to continue using IPv4 in its products through the end of
2014. Our products will continue to require that network endpoints be specified using IPv4 addresses, or hostnames which resolve to IPv4 addresses.
That is what you told me two years ago. I am not holding my breath.
That's what the told me also, but it's not up to me to do this.
I can not make it support it the have do it.
ready. So my guess is that:
1) It is your router that is not IPv6 ready
It's the router... it's a Cisco E3000
I'm running Server2008 Enterprise... it says it's IPv6 ready.. :)
What happens if you open up a command window and type:
"ipconfig" ?
says:
.
IPv6 address: 2002:ae39:cd76:0:89a0:1f59:d57d:61da
Link-local IPv6: fe80::89a0:1f59:d57d:61da%10
IPv4 Address: 192.168.1.2
Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway: fe80::6a7f:74ff:fec4:3c75%10
Therefore, PC Micro will not be incorporating direct support for connecting to network endpoints using IPv6 addresses this year and has decided to continue using IPv4 in its products through the end of 2014. Our products will continue to require that network endpoints be
specified using IPv4 addresses, or hostnames which resolve to IPv4 addresses.
But... if that router has a link local address, it must have IPv6...
So maybe it DOES have IPv6 but you need to enable something to make it work...
I suggest you ask Cisco.
What I read here is something different from what you read. You read:
"Mike of PCM will make NetSerial Ipv6 compatible hi told me"
What I read is: "I will not add IPv6, certainly not this year."
So what does this tell you Michiel. I have a DLink DIR- 655,
According to the m anual, there should be an IPv6 setup tab, which is missing.
Here is what I get when I run ipconfig
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::c71:c459:6cce:9fea%3
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.187
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1
Tunnel adapter Local Area Connection* 11:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
IPv6 Address. . . . . . . . . .. :
2001:0:9d38:6ab8:38f0:1b2d:3f57:ff44
Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::38f0:1b2d:3f57:ff44%5
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
So what does this tell you Michiel. I have a DLink DIR- 655,
According to the m anual, there should be an IPv6 setup tab,
which is missing.
Then perhaps the firmware version is older than the version of the
manual? Perhaps you need a firmware upgrade?
Then perhaps the firmware version is older than the version of the manual? Perhaps you need a firmware upgrade?
It is setup without any help from the router by your Windows 8. Quite useless, Teredo is broken, but it is another indication that your router has no idea of IPv6. Teredo is kind of a last resort. The fact that your Win8 tries to set up a Teredo tunnel indicates, there is no other way available.
Then perhaps the firmware version is older than the version of the
manual? Perhaps you need a firmware upgrade?
I found the manual and took a peek. It says that from version 2.3 of july 3, 2012 it supports IPv6 routing and firewall.
How to set it up is described on pages 40-54.
So what does this tell you Michiel. I have a DLink DIR- 655,
According to the m anual, there should be an IPv6 setup tab, which is
missing.
What I read here is something different from what you read. You
read:
"Mike of PCM will make NetSerial Ipv6 compatible hi told me"
What I read is: "I will not add IPv6, certainly not this year."
I dont have say it was this year.
D-Link does a lousy job maintaining the firmwares and WLAN reliability
is quite poor.
D-Link does a lousy job maintaining the firmwares and WLAN
reliability is quite poor.
Plus they have a long history of overheating.
I have the latest firmware installed. When I got the router, it was
still a pre-N version. I went to the DLInk site and got the latest firmware update. I also downloaded the manual for it. The manual
shows the tab, but my config page does not have it :(
The help tech in email did not know how to answer it. One of these
days I will call the number and see what is going on. Strange thing
is that this is much newer then my previous router, and it had IPv6 configuration. Aloso a DLink.
It is setup without any help from the router by your Windows 8.
Quite useless, Teredo is broken, but it is another indication
that your router has no idea of IPv6. Teredo is kind of a last
resort. The fact that your Win8 tries to set up a Teredo tunnel
indicates, there is no other way available.
OK, so windows is trying, without any luck <G>
Then perhaps the firmware version is older than the version of
the manual? Perhaps you need a firmware upgrade?
I found the manual and took a peek. It says that from version 2.3
of july 3, 2012 it supports IPv6 routing and firewall.
How to set it up is described on pages 40-54.
Hardware version A2 and firmwar version 1.37NA
I have read the manual :(
There are two major hardware versions of the DIR-655 with different firmwares. The older doesn't support IPv6 and can't be updated, i.e. D-Link doesn't provide an update. The Rev 2 model supports IPv6.
I had the older model and sold it because of that.
I wouldn't recommend D-Link routers anyway unless the specific type is supported by OpenWRT. D-Link does a lousy job maintaining the
firmwares and WLAN reliability is quite poor.
D-Link does a lousy job maintaining the firmwares and WLAN
reliability is quite poor.
Plus they have a long history of overheating.
I had the older model and sold it because of that.
I wouldn't recommend D-Link routers anyway unless the specific type
is supported by OpenWRT. D-Link does a lousy job maintaining the
firmwares and WLAN reliability is quite poor.
Then I fear you ran into the same problem as Markus. You probably have the older version of the DIR-655 with the hardware that does not support IPv6.
I do not know how you feel about this, but if it were to happen to me, I would be severely disappointed. Any chance of getting your money back?
The help tech in email did not know how to answer it. One of these
days I will call the number and see what is going on. Strange thing
is that this is much newer then my previous router, and it had IPv6
configuration. Aloso a DLink.
So why did you by a new one in the first place?
Hardware version A2 and firmwar version 1.37NA
That means nothing to me.
I have read the manual :(
It looks like the manual and the hardware do not match.
Franly I find this misleading. To issue the same type number to hardware that differs so much.
It's not just that router. D-Link's IPv6 strategy was misleading
totally. They gave users the impression that they will add IPv6 to the more expensive routers but that never happened. Instead they sold new models (slightly upgraded hardware) which drove some users away from D-Link.
I had the older model and sold it because of that.
Yep, and I sold nearly all D-Link stuff. Also had some "professional"
APs and a lot of WLAN problems. Debugging pointed to a very poor
firmware and bad choice of default values. Sorry, but selling semi-professional stuff with so much issues is a show stopper. The APs were about 150 Euros with a warranty of 11 years.
Guess what, D-Link dropped the firmware support for those APs quite
soon. So I replaced all D-Link stuff with TP-Link running OpenWRT.
Much more control and features, and a reliable WLAN.
The best current solutions for IPv6 are TP-Link with OpenWRT or some Mini-PCs like from PC Engines running OpenWRT or pfSense. There are
some new SOHO routers with dual core ARMs around 1GHz on the market
now, but I would wait until they are supported by OpenWRT. They're
also quite expensive at the moment. I think that will change soon
because all chipset vendors are moving to dual/quadcore ARMs. So will
the router vendors. The last generation was a 560/680MHz CPU, 128MB
RAM and 8-128MB flash. The new one is a dual core ARM, 1GHz, 256MB RAM
and 128MB flash. That's ideal for running also some extra tasks like asterisk or maybe husky ;-)
I do not know how you feel about this, but if it were to happen
to me, I would be severely disappointed. Any chance of getting
your money back?
Not a chance of that <G> I got it at an auction sale. Cost me $10 or less.
So why did you by a new one in the first place?
It was there, and it was newer then what I had <G>
I still have it. It is a DIR-615
Franly I find this misleading. To issue the same type number to
hardware that differs so much.
You mean the model number?
That is why they have version numbers on them. Makes it a bit
difficult indeed.
Ah, you wanted the newer model, just for the sake of having the newer model.
I still have it. It is a DIR-615
So put in back ik place and enjoy IPv6. ;-)
Ah, you wanted the newer model, just for the sake of having the
newer model.
No, not just that. The newer model has a higher speed as well <G>,
and a bit of a stronger signal
I still have it. It is a DIR-615
So put it back in place and enjoy IPv6. ;-)
I dont think that my ISP is much interested in IPv6.
Biggest carrier in Canada, and they will do what they want to do, and
not what they need to do.
Lots of promises, but that is all it ever amounts to.
My friend lives in a mobile home park. He asked 10 years ago when
they would put DSL into the park, The answer was always 'in about a
year' It is still not there. He has switched to cable.
You don't have to wait for them. Get a tunnel from SixXs or he.net. It works!
Biggest carrier in Canada, and they will do what they want to do,
and not what they need to do.
The arrogance of power...
Lots of promises, but that is all it ever amounts to.
Sounds familiar... :-(
My friend lives in a mobile home park. He asked 10 years ago when
they would put DSL into the park, The answer was always 'in about a
year' It is still not there. He has switched to cable.
Then he is lucky the cable guys cover it.
You don't have to wait for them. Get a tunnel from SixXs or
he.net. It works!
Yeah, IU've been reading about that from you guys
My friend lives in a mobile home park. He asked 10 years ago
when they would put DSL into the park, The answer was always 'in
about a year' It is still not there. He has switched to cable.
Then he is lucky the cable guys cover it.
It was a choice he did not want to make, but if he wanted high speed
it was the only choice open to him, other then microwave.
Unfortunately true.
And I also got the strong feeling that IPv6 support is going to be
some kind of lottery for users.
There are several methods to get IPv6 to the CPE,
several ways how addresses and prefixes are assigned, and there's the issue how addresses and prefixes are assigned in the LAN.
Also we have to deal with subprefix delegation to other routers in the LAN.
I doubt that any vendor will support all methods and get everything
right.
And all that will overwhelm most users. One public IPv4 address and
NAT is simple to understand. But with IPv6 users get public addresses inside their LAN. They'll panic :-)
Yeah, IU've been reading about that from you guys
So how about it? Have you checked the he.net web page?
My friend lives in a mobile home park. He asked 10 years ago
when they would put DSL into the park, The answer was always 'in
about a year' It is still not there. He has switched to cable.
Then he is lucky the cable guys cover it.
It was a choice he did not want to make, but if he wanted high speed
it was the only choice open to him, other then microwave.
Microwave? I am not sure what that means in this context.
My friend lives in a mobile home park. He asked 10 years ago
when they would put DSL into the park, The answer was always 'in
about a year' It is still not there. He has switched to cable.
Then he is lucky the cable guys cover it.
It was a choice he did not want to make, but if he wanted high speedMicrowave? I am not sure what that means in this context.
it was the only choice open to him, other then microwave.
TWIMC: my node (2:5020/545) is finally reachable via native
${areatag}.
10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru [2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^
MvdV> ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru
[2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...
So how about it? Have you checked the he.net web page?
Not yet. I've been following Markus's writings on modems. I may just follow his advice. In fact I was already looking at those TP routers
the other day.
Microwave? I am not sure what that means in this context.
Microwave I think anyway. You point a dish of some sort, to a central transmitter which gives you High Speed Internet of some sort.
It is more expensive, but for people in rural areas who also do not
have cable, that is the only option, other then POTS
There are several methods to get IPv6 to the CPE,
several ways how addresses and prefixes are assigned, and there's the
issue how addresses and prefixes are assigned in the LAN.
Also we have to deal with subprefix delegation to other routers in
the LAN.
MvdV> ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru
[2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...
MvdV>> ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru
[2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...
or:
Good fool, dead fool?
MvdV>>> ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru
[2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...
or:
Good fool, dead fool?
There are several methods to get IPv6 to the CPE,
It depends on the methods choosen by the providers. If they agree on a
few common types it would make things more simple. Take classic PPPoE
for example. Since PPP supports the transport of multiple protocols
PPP can transport also IPv6 in parallel with IPv4. But you could also
use a second PPPoE session for IPv6.
Another issue will be IPv4, i.e. the lack of addresses.
That's going to reverse the current situation. Youl'll have native
IPv6 but IPv4 is tunnelled. One strategy is to tunnel IPv4 to the provider's NAT platform which will share public IPv4 addresses.
several ways how addresses and prefixes are assigned, and
there's the issue how addresses and prefixes are assigned in the
LAN.
There are DHCP, SLAAC and a combination of both. If the provider gives
a cheatsheet to Joe, he might be able to follow that and configure his router. Haven't seen much providers doing that.
For DTAG VoIP I had to reverse engineer their VoIP gateway address
plan to be able to create a secure config for my SIP gateway. Very professional ;-(
Also we have to deal with subprefix delegation to other routers
in the LAN.
Native IPv6 comes with a /48 or /56 for the LAN(s)
and a /64 for the transfer network. And the next marketing hype is IoT (Internet of Things) which I wouldn't place in my normal LAN.
10:35 [3576] BEGIN standalone, binkd/1.1a-49/Win32 -p -P5020/545 binkd.cfg 10:35 [3576] creating a poll for 2:5020/545@fidonet (`d' flavour) 10:35 [3576] clientmgr started + 10:35 [3252] call to 2:5020/545@fidonet 10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru [2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]... 10:35 [3252] connected +
There are DHCP, SLAAC and a combination of both. If the provider
gives a cheatsheet to Joe, he might be able to follow that and
configure his router. Haven't seen much providers doing that.
10:35 [3576] BEGIN standalone, binkd/1.1a-49/Win32 -p -P5020/545
binkd.cfg 10:35 [3576] creating a poll for 2:5020/545@fidonet (`d'
flavour) 10:35 [3576] clientmgr started + 10:35 [3252] call to
2:5020/545@fidonet 10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru
[2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]... 10:35 [3252] connected +
So far I haven't done any special configuration. (except some port forwarding)
The modem came pre-configured for IPv6, and it was already turned on in my OS on my computers.
I don't get a connetion on IPv4 either,
so I don't think it's a specific IPv6 problem...
I don't get a connetion on IPv4 either,
so I don't think it's a specific IPv6 problem...
Some sell you a branded router with a simple UI and others force you
to use their official box and won't even tell you the PPP credentials (configured via TR-069).
BTW, there's a discussion about making "Zwangsrouter" illegal and it
seems we'll get a decison in favour of the customers.
Or the central heating for a warm welcome ;-)
10:35 [3252] trying fido.gremlin.ru^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^
[2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...
Good foot, dead foot?
+ 22:21 [1236] call to 2:5020/545@fidonet
22:21 [1236] trying fido.gremlin.ru [2a01:4f8:140:9ffb:900d:f001:dead:f001]...
? 22:21 [1236] connection to 2:5020/545@fidonet failed
That was a short party...
BTW, there's a discussion about making "Zwangsrouter" illegal and it
seems we'll get a decison in favour of the customers.
Recently there was an security problem with AVM's Fritzbox routers
The security issue is that someone could retrieve passwords remotely.
That was used to reconfigure the VoIP part and allowed third parties
to make telephone calls via the hacked Fritzbox for free, i.e. paid by
the Fritzbox's user.
AVM fixed the problem and released new firmwares, but the enforced
routers got their updates a few days later because of the modified firmware versions.
If you own the router, you'll have to pay those calls. We got a law
about liability for bad products but it doesn't include pecuniary
losses. And you know those EULAs.
And what about the users with an enforced router which is owned by the provider?
At first the providers told the involved customers that they (the customers) have to pay.
When the security issue went public in the main media and customers complained about the enforced routers the providers backed down.
It was one of those famous "without any prejudice" back downs to avoid
a leading decision by a court. So we still don't know if the provider
is reliable for any damages caused by his enforced router.
There's a similar problem with the cloudification of SOHO routers. Who will pay the bill if the vendor's cloud is hacked and therefore your router too?
Microwave? I am not sure what that means in this context.
Microwave I think anyway. You point a dish of some sort, to a
central transmitter which gives you High Speed Internet of some
sort.
That is available here too. The central transmitter is some 65000 klicks up! ;-)
It is more expensive, but for people in rural areas who also do not
have cable, that is the only option, other then POTS
POTS is fading out here. Very few providers still offer dial-up Internet.
Internet via satellite is available all over Europe though, and yes, it is more expensive than a fixed line. But it is affordable if you do not need top speed.
Sysop: | Nelgin |
---|---|
Location: | Plano, TX |
Users: | 510 |
Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
Uptime: | 134:52:59 |
Calls: | 8,201 |
Calls today: | 3 |
Files: | 15,446 |
Messages: | 913,918 |