Re: Frontier rural FIOS & IPv6

[Luke Guillory <lguillory () reservetele com>]

My mom was cheap and only had pulse dialing in the 90s, it made using pagers difficult. Had to flip to tone after it 
dialed.



Ns

Sent from my iPad

>



On Mar 31, 2019, at 8:53 PM, Matt Hoppes <mattlists () rivervalleyinternet net> wrote:
> The telephone example:
> What IS the benefit of DTMF other than I can dial faster?  None. And I can use IVRs. Again - no impact to me as a 
> telephone company.
>
> As far as ipv6. It’s been proven things “load faster” because the ipv6 servers of the various websites are not as 
> heavily loaded as the ipv4 variants.
>
> All things equal - ipv6 doesn’t load faster. There’s literally no advantage to ipv6 other than “I’m out of ipv4 and 
> need to continue to provide public routable Ips to my customers. “
>
> > On Mar 31, 2019, at 9:42 PM, Mike Leber <mleber () he net> wrote:
> >
> > You are assuming the routing and transit relationships in IPv4 are the
> > same in IPv6.
> >
> > IPv4 has many many many suboptimal transit relationships where routing
> > is purposely suboptimal on the part of the networks in the path due to
> > competitive reasons.  One example of suboptimal routing is traffic not
> > being exchanged in a closer location where both networks exist and
> > instead being routed hundreds or thousands of miles out of the way.
> >
> > Customers don't get to influence the decisions of monopolies etc.
> >
> > Customers choose based on inertia, brand experience, and what options
> > are even available to them to get IPv6 vs IPv4.
> >
> > IPv6 has randomized some of these vendor relationships due to some
> > upstream networks not even implementing IPv6, meaning the downstream
> > networks were forced to make other choices.
> >
> >
> > > On 3/31/19 6:21 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> > > It is not possible for web pages to load faster over IPv6 than over IPv4.  All other factors being equal, IPv6 has 
> > > higher overhead than IPv4 for the same payload throughput.  This means that it is physically impossible for IPv6 to 
> > > be move payload bytes "faster" than IPv4 can move the same payload.
> > >
> > > In other words, IPv6 has a higher "packet tax" than IPv4.  Since you have no choice but to pay the "packet tax" the 
> > > actual payload data flows more slowly.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Ca By
> > > > Sent: Sunday, 31 March, 2019 18:53
> > > > To: Matt Hoppes
> > > > Cc: Aaron C. de Bruyn; NANOG mailing list
> > > > Subject: Re: Frontier rural FIOS & IPv6
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 4:20 PM Matt Hoppes
> > > > <mattlists () rivervalleyinternet net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   Going to play devils advocate.
> > > >
> > > >   If frontier has a ton of ipv4 addresses, what benefit is there
> > > > to them in rolling out ipv6?
> > > >
> > > >   What benefit is there to you?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I love xbox and xbox works better on ipv6,
> > > >
> > > > https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/wed.general.palmer.xbox_.47
> > > > .pdf
> > > >
> > > > Also, webpages load faster , and i love fast web pages
> > > >
> > > > https://code.fb.com/networking-traffic/ipv6-it-s-time-to-get-on-
> > > > board/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > https://www.akamai.com/fr/fr/multimedia/documents/technical-
> > > > publication/a-case-for-faster-mobile-web-in-cellular-ipv6-
> > > > networks.pdf
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   On Mar 31, 2019, at 7:11 PM, C. A. Fillekes
> > > > <cfillekes () gmail com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >       Still it's pretty darn good having real broadband on the
> > > > farm.  One thing at a time.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >       But, let's start thinking about ways to get Frontier up to
> > > > speed on the IPv6 thing.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >       On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 4:24 PM Aaron C. de Bruyn
> > > > <aaron () heyaaron com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >           You're not alone.
> > > >
> > > >           I talked with my local provider about 4 years ago and
> > > > they said "We will probably start looking into IPv6 next year".
> > > >           I talked with them last month and they said "Yeah,
> > > > everyone seems to be offering it.  I guess I'll have to start reading
> > > > how to implement it".
> > > >
> > > >           I'm sure 2045 will finally be the year of IPv6
> > > > everywhere.
> > > >
> > > >           -A
> > > >
> > > >           On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:36 AM C. A. Fillekes
> > > > <cfillekes () gmail com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >               So by COB yesterday we now officially have FIOS
> > > > at our farm.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >               Went from 3Mbps to around 30 measured average.
> > > > Yay.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >               It's a business account, Frontier.  But...still
> > > > no IPv6.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >               The new router's capable of it.  What's the hold
> > > > up?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >               Customer service's response is "We don't offer
> > > > that".