bclbob
join:2000-06-23
Oak Park, IL |
to jlivingood
Re: [IPv6] Deployment of IPv6 BeginsLooks like I'm going to keep 6to4 going on my cisco router a little while longer yet... |
|
1 recommendation |
to mahohmei1
i'm not sure those companies are all that willing to put the effort into IPv6 support, I mean TiVo can't even update their Premiere models regularly with stability patches let alone finish the HD menu and activate the second half of the dual core processor, and Nintendo will probably hold off until their next gen console. PlayStation 3 on the otherhand is a toss up and am hoping they do include IPv6 which has been asked of them by a large majority of their customers for awhile. |
|
| |
to jlivingood
will the Cisco DPC 3010 be on that list and if it is when can we expect it and if its no can we get it added? |
|
 SunnyRuns from Clowns
join:2001-08-19 |
to jlivingood
(topic move) Will Cisco DPC 3010 be supported by Comcast?Moderator ActionThe post that was here, has been moved to a new topic .. » Will Cisco DPC 3010 be supported by Comcast? |
actions · 2011-Nov-11 8:17 am · (locked) |
 ArrayListDevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ |
to jlivingood
Re: [IPv6] Deployment of IPv6 BeginsI only want gateway device support. none of this /128 stuff. give me a /96 or /64 |
|
 SolarPupOffice365 Rockstar
Premium Member
join:2002-03-07
Windsor, CO
1 recommendation |
to jlivingood
Jason,
Thanks for yours and everyone's hard work on this project.. definitely a huge improvement.. However, it is a bit ridiculous that Business customers can't use it.. and like someone else said their sales person is clueless, it's the same with mine. I just renewed my contract for 3 years because I love the speeds, and 24 hr support for business, but why in the world did business customers get left out?
I know the techops manager and headend manager here personally, but it doesn't help anything suggesting to them, because A) they're just doing what is pushed down to them and B) I'm just a lone business customer in a coverage area of 95,000.
Can you shine some light on this at all? |
|
 NetDog
Premium Member
join:2002-03-04
Hollywood, FL
1 recommendation |
NetDog
Premium Member
2011-Nov-12 5:35 pm
@SolarPup, Can you support 6to4 tunnel? Comcast has a 6to4 tunnel online for Comcast customers. Here are the directions: » www.comcast6.net/6to4-config.php |
|
 jlivingood
Premium Member
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
1 recommendation |
to SolarPup
said by SolarPup:However, it is a bit ridiculous that Business customers can't use it.. and like someone else said their sales person is clueless, it's the same with mine. I just renewed my contract for 3 years because I love the speeds, and 24 hr support for business, but why in the world did business customers get left out? In this case it is easier to start with residential first, as the devices are simpler cable modems without a gateway/router/firewall function. This is one of the reasons we did not lead with support for home gateway devices - it is incrementally more complex. So we want to get rolling now, so that means we wanted to focus on the simplest possible operational and support scenario. Next up is home gateway support. After that I imagine it will be business class support. You can rest assured I see it as a priority. But we need to get SMC to deliver IPv6 support, which we are working on (and Business Class folks are watching this thread). |
|
1 recommendation |
Jason,
Would you be able to shed some light on a few things? Even if just one of these would be great. I am doing a lot of IPv6 education in the local area and I fully expect a whole lot of questions surrounding Comcast's IPv6 deployment (and many more people to show up to my talks).
#1. What's the plan as far as prefixes go, ultimately? Will residential customers be able to pick up larger than a /64 for their own purposes? A /60? /56? /48?
#2. Are there any plans on charging per individual devices found with globally routable IPv6 addresses on a customer's network?
#2 sounds far-fetched to me but it was a question I've already been asked by a few people and would love an official answer to. |
|
SolarPupOffice365 Rockstar
Premium Member
join:2002-03-07
Windsor, CO |
to jlivingood
said by jlivingood:In this case it is easier to start with residential first, as the devices are simpler cable modems without a gateway/router/firewall function. This is one of the reasons we did not lead with support for home gateway devices - it is incrementally more complex. So we want to get rolling now, so that means we wanted to focus on the simplest possible operational and support scenario.
Next up is home gateway support. After that I imagine it will be business class support. You can rest assured I see it as a priority. But we need to get SMC to deliver IPv6 support, which we are working on (and Business Class folks are watching this thread).
Awesome, thank you! |
|
jlivingood
Premium Member
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
1 recommendation |
to magamiako
said by magamiako:#1. What's the plan as far as prefixes go, ultimately? Will residential customers be able to pick up larger than a /64 for their own purposes? A /60? /56? /48?
Per » blog.comcast.com/2011/11 ··· ogy.html we will support shorter prefixes eventually in 2012. But initially it will be just a /64. Exact timing in 2012 is TBD. We'll announce more details on this when we begin deployments supporting home gateway devices. said by magamiako:#2. Are there any plans on charging per individual devices found with globally routable IPv6 addresses on a customer's network?
#2 sounds far-fetched to me but it was a question I've already been asked by a few people and would love an official answer to.
Not at this time. IMO this would discourage demand for IPv6 and this in turn means less content on IPv6 (that's the opposite of what we want - which is pervasive IPv6). |
|
 whfsdude
Premium Member
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
1 recommendation |
to jlivingood
Got two questions for you. 1. Are Comcast's v6 DNS servers whitelisted on Google? 2. Has there been any discussion about v6 on Xfinity WiFi ( » www.comcast.com/wifi/ )? |
|
jlivingood
Premium Member
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA |
said by whfsdude:Got two questions for you.
1. Are Comcast's v6 DNS servers whitelisted on Google?
2. Has there been any discussion about v6 on Xfinity WiFi ( »www.comcast.com/wifi/ )?
1 - No, not at this time. 2 - Yes, and this is planned for 2012 (hopefully). |
|
 NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands
Premium Member
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Pace 5268AC
TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
1 recommendation |
to jlivingood
said by jlivingood:Next up is home gateway support. After that I imagine it will be business class support. You can rest assured I see it as a priority. But we need to get SMC to deliver IPv6 support, which we are working on (and Business Class folks are watching this thread).
SMC implies that their SMCD3G-BIZ model is already IPv6 capable. » www.smc.com/index.cfm?ev ··· pid=1678
|
|
jlivingood
Premium Member
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
2 recommendations |
Separating reality from brochureware is our speciality on these device tests.  That device does not really and truly support IPv6 yet in our view. We are hopeful that it soon will. |
|
AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
AVonGauss
Premium Member
2011-Nov-14 11:03 pm
said by jlivingood:Separating reality from brochureware is our speciality on these device tests. Wonder if its SPX, capable, as well?  |
|
 somms
join:2003-07-28
Centerville, UT |
to jlivingood
said by jlivingood:Separating reality from brochureware is our speciality on these device tests. That device does not really and truly support IPv6 yet in our view. We are hopeful that it soon will. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br ··· hurewareSLAM!  Yeah, never been a fan myself of anything SMC-branded! |
|
 netcool
Premium Member
join:2008-11-05
Englewood, CO
1 recommendation |
to NetFixer
said by NetFixer:SMC implies that their SMCD3G-BIZ model is already IPv6 capable.
I think they are probably referring to cable modem management ipv6 support. I don't recall seeing any configurable ipv6 options in the SMCD3G for static ips, dns servers etc. Which brings an interesting question to mind, will RIP-NG be used or some other design for assigning static IPs (I hope not static routes!) |
|
1 recommendation |
to jlivingood
Thanks for the info!
Good stuff. Can't wait to get off of this tunnel.
Here's another one for you, less Comcastic, more Technical.
Have you guys seen any tangible improvements in throughput with IPv6 versus IPv4? How has the lack of checksums on v4, lack of PMTU on routers, and the reduction in NAT improved network performance as a whole?
Would be awesome to see a paper or talk given on that! |
|
NetDog
Premium Member
join:2002-03-04
Hollywood, FL
1 recommendation |
NetDog
Premium Member
2011-Nov-15 7:02 pm
said by magamiako:Have you guys seen any tangible improvements in throughput with IPv6 versus IPv4? How has the lack of checksums on v4, lack of PMTU on routers, and the reduction in NAT improved network performance as a whole?
Would be awesome to see a paper or talk given on that!
I like the sound of that, I will talk to the RMv6TF about adding that to the 2012 North American IPv6 Summit.. » www.rmv6tf.org/default.htm |
|
1 recommendation |
to mahohmei1
While XP SP3 is, in fact, dual-stack-capable, it defaults to Teredo on the IPv6 side; that's one reason I prefer 7 (over both XP and Vista). TiVo and Wii will doubtless need firmware updates to support IPv6 in any way/shape/form (likely dual-stack in both cases). Within-LAN devices would only be a worry if accessed from outside the LAN (such as printing). |
|
 DarkLogixTexan and Proud
Premium Member
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX |
DarkLogix
Premium Member
2011-Nov-17 11:19 am
I imagine when entertainment devices get IPv6 that all ports exept the ones they use will be blocked on them
then we can just forget about NAT and UPnP |
|
NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands
Premium Member
join:2004-06-24
The Boro Netgear CM500
Pace 5268AC
TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
2 recommendations |
NetFixer
Premium Member
2011-Nov-17 7:14 pm
said by DarkLogix:I imagine when entertainment devices get IPv6 that all ports exept the ones they use will be blocked on them
then we can just forget about NAT and UPnP
Actually, a perimeter SPI firewall can still protect devices behind it whether NAT is used or not. Many people seem to think that NAT is the only protection for blocking unwanted incoming requests to specific ports on specific devices, but that is not the case. NAT will certainly be made obsolete with full implementation of IPv6 (after IPv4 is history), but I suspect that UPnP will still be alive because applications, devices and trojans will still need/want to be able to control your firewall to open ports. |
|
|
| |
to DarkLogix
No ipv6 for the zoom 5341 yet? Lame. Since I read on dslreports pleasanton is the first place and my parents house is there and I put a 5341 there. |
|
DarkLogixTexan and Proud
Premium Member
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
1 recommendation |
to NetFixer
said by NetFixer:said by DarkLogix:I imagine when entertainment devices get IPv6 that all ports exept the ones they use will be blocked on them
then we can just forget about NAT and UPnP
Actually, a perimeter SPI firewall can still protect devices behind it whether NAT is used or not. Many people seem to think that NAT is the only protection for blocking unwanted incoming requests to specific ports on specific devices, but that is not the case. NAT will certainly be made obsolete with full implementation of IPv6 (after IPv4 is history), but I suspect that UPnP will still be alive because applications, devices and trojans will still need/want to be able to control your firewall to open ports. With IPv6 every device will have a public IP most media devices are already locked down (try hacking the data from a DTV reciver or an XBOX360) so they don't really need a firewall computers on the otherhand do but with a simple restriction localy ont eh computer you can block external clients from reaching anything UPnP is already a secruity risk (there are viruses that use it to spread already) so the sooner that Upnp dies the better) with IPv6 all devices will have a link local IP and a public IP so any lan services can just be limited to the link local IP and internet apps to the public and as the link local is non-routed many firewalls can allso become unneeded |
|
 your moderator at work
 hidden :
hidden :
hidden :
|
AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL |
to DarkLogix
Re: [IPv6] Deployment of IPv6 Beginssaid by DarkLogix:UPnP is already a secruity risk (there are viruses that use it to spread already) so the sooner that Upnp dies the better)
with IPv6 all devices will have a link local IP and a public IP so any lan services can just be limited to the link local IP and internet apps to the public and as the link local is non-routed many firewalls can allso become unneeded
Even though each device on a local network would have a global address, that does not preclude one or more devices (i.e. routers) in front of the local network from providing security services. Personally I'm not sure how this will play out exactly, but I think there is a very good chance consumer level routers will implement some security mechanisms, which once thats true then a mechanism similar in concept to UPnP will be desired. Relying on applications to only bind to specific addresses has several technical and many sociological issues - most users don't want to have to know that much. Clicking an allow button on a single device for an advertised service may be palatable. If you allow any configuration to change, you open the possibility of exploitation, its all in how you handle and manage it that counts. |
|
DarkLogixTexan and Proud
Premium Member
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
1 recommendation |
DarkLogix
Premium Member
2011-Nov-18 10:06 am
Well on a computer microsoft could add a patch that limits all apps to the link local address and a popup for when an app wants to use the global address
then you get the allow popup and if its not allowed then it can't use the global address
for entertainment devices the makers should already know what will need access to the global address and what only needs link local
if UPnP stays around then it needs to be revised with some security measures (maybe a popup asking it you want to allow an app to use UPnP to alter your router and a password that could be set on the router to deny UPnP requests) |
|
That device does not really and truly support IPv6 yet in our view. We are hopeful that it soon will.
Yeah, never been a fan myself of anything SMC-branded! 
