Re: another tilt at the Verizon FIOS IPv6 windmill

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Andrew Kirch <trelane () trelane net> wrote:
> I had to beat up on AT&T quite a bit, but instead of letting them "make
> notes", escalate to tier-2 because you can't reach work.  Explain that you
> must have IPv6 to reach work to the tier-2.  If they won't help demand to
> be escalated further.  Your time on the phone costs them money.

it's fun to screw up their ARPU, but really... in the end, if they
don't want to be helpful to your cause / the intertubes, then why
contnue to give them duckets?

i don't see any hope for VZ nn this, sadly... and I bet ATT is taking
it's time doing something useful as well, because 'telco', and because
they have enough v4 that they don't HAVE to do anything yet. (they can
still roll out territories with v4 for a long while to come)

spend your money on providers that will do what you want... Also it's
good to recognize that your single link move from ATT -> comcast isn't
going to move the needle at ATT as far as 'gosh we really should care
about this now!'

-chris

> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Seth Mos <seth.mos () dds nl> wrote:
>
> > Ricky Beam schreef op 18-7-2015 om 1:14:
> >
> >  On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 06:25:26 -0400, Christopher Morrow <
> > > morrowc.lists () gmail com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > mean that your UBee has to do dhcpv6? (or the downstream thingy from
> > > > the UBee has to do dhcpv6?)
> > >
> > > The Ubee "router" is in bridge mode. Customers have ZERO access to the
> > > thing, even when it is running in routed mode. So I have no idea what it's
> > > trying to do.  All I can say is no RAs are coming from it (through
> > > it/whatever) It *could* be it's blocking it -- it's multicast, so who knows
> > > what it's doing with it.  Without RAs, nothing connected to it will even
> > > attempt IPv6 -- the RA being the indicator to use DHCP or not, and who's
> > > the router.
> > >
> > > And further, when I tell my Cisco 1841 to do DHCP anyway, I get no answer.
> > >
> > > So, the blanket statement that "it's ready" isn't true.
> > For a point of interest, the Ubee 320 and 321 wireless routers/modems are
> > in use by Ziggo in the Netherlands.
> >
> > Although they've rolled back the 320 modems to a older firmware, the 321
> > is still active on their IPv6 rollout. The problems were not strictly
> > related to Ipv6 perse, but the newer firmware broken Voice on these all-the
> > -things-in-one devices.
> >
> > The 321 appears to be unaffected and is still active, although in just a
> > few regions at this point of the rollout.
> >
> > What's very specific about this rollout in relation to the above, is that
> > Ziggo is currently only supporting IPv6 with the Ubee in router mode (with
> > the wifi hotspot). The good news is that it also operates a DHCP-PD server
> > so that you can connect your own router to the Ubee and still get IPv6
> > routed to you out of the /56 allocated to the customer.
> >
> > For now, all the customers with the Ubee in bridge mode are SOL. It's not
> > clear what the reason is, but Ubee in bridge mode with IPv6 is listed on
> > the road map. If that's intentional policy or that the firmware isn't ready
> > yet is not clear at this point.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Seth