reply to somms
Re: [IPv6] Deployment of IPv6 Begins
said by somms:I got one of each and they really use the same firmware so I think the lack of a checkmark is a simple formality and nothing to worry about. Plus I got the same E4200 router, Just be sure to update the firmware to 1.0.03 since it includes native IPv6 support
According to the official supported deveice link, I would have to now downgrade my Motorola SB6121 to the older/obsolete SB6120 in order to participate!
ctgreybeardOld dogs can learn new tricksPremium
said by Mike Wolf:I just updated my brand new E3200 to the newest release (1.0.02 (build 9)) and it also includes IPV6 native support. The release notes state: "This build is certified with the IPv6 Ready Logo Phase-2 (Gold)." Hopefully that's a good thing.
Plus I got the same E4200 router, Just be sure to update the firmware to 1.0.03 since it includes native IPv6 support
Old dogs can learn new tricks!
hey greybeard long time no see!! man its good to see your posts again. I've been so busy on the tv side of things I completely forgot about this side. Anyway the update for my E4200 said the same thing about phase 2 gold but it still doesn't have 6to4 configuration support as an option.
I'd consider the lack of 6to4 on the E4200 a good thing. It's being deprecated and has caused some serious brokenness on the IPv6 internet.
While you wait for native v6, you're much better off getting a static tunnel from HE or SixXs (AYIYA works from behind NAT), or even using Teredo.
reply to whfsdude
Re: [IPv6] Deployment of IPv6 Begins but I for some reasn can't figure out how to make the HE and SixXs stuff work lol. I'm used to the 6RD settings where I can enter them into the router configuration page.
reply to whfsdude
said by whfsdude:Umm? 6to4 comes higher up in the ipv6 prioritization than Teredo. Most OS's will prefer it to Teredo (and many OS's don't even support Teredo without additional software, namely Miredo). 6to4 works fine as long as the tunneling is working which is true of Teredo or a static tunnel. As to working behind NAT, that shouldn't matter if he's willing to run some ipv6 software on the router. My router does the 6to4 work and it advertises ipv6 addresses to my machines on the LAN. They don't need to deal with NAT'ed ipv6 because the ipv6 isn't behind any NAT. If my router didn't support ipv6 then yes I'd agree that Teredo or static tunnels might be a better option. And I'd go with static tunnels being preferable to 6to4 but not to Teredo.
I'd consider the lack of 6to4 on the E4200 a good thing. It's being deprecated and has caused some serious brokenness on the IPv6 internet..
And to my knowledge Comcast doesn't run a Teredo exchange while they do run 6to4 exchanges. So performance should be better with 6to4 over Teredo.
reply to ctgreybeard
I'm concerned about what exactly the hardware version 2.0 of the E4200 brings to the table as compared to the hardware version 1.0. I did find this cool help site. »www.tunnelbroker.net/forums/inde···c=1850.0
Alright well I bit the bullet and gotthe e4200v2 and I must say its a nice router. It handles IPv6 the same as the original version, but it has a better processor 1.2GHz and more memory 256MB and the usb storage is much faster.
this post is in response to a discussion that started to go off topic here. »Re: Evidence of 8 Downstream Channel Bonding - Post Here
My point is 1% is still leaving 99% of the customers who want IPv6 out of luck. To be fair I know Jason and John work very hard at their jobs and I have nothing but respect and admeration for them, but I'm just stating that Comcast's rollout to four more states as they stated in November is currently only for customers with computers directly connected to their modems and possibly we are a long ways off to getting to the point of assigning IPv6 to the majority of customers who use routers as their gateway device. It was mentioned here »blog.comcast.com/2011/11/ipv6-de···ent.html that "This first phase will support certain types of directly connected CPE, where a single computer is connected directly to a cable modem. Subsequent phases in 2011 and 2012 will support home gateway devices and variable length prefixes." yet there has not been any word since November (it's now March) as to what has taken place since this first phase or when these subsequent phases are to take place. Granted as it was stated in both these articles that things could happen that could delay the national rollout, customers may start to think that unless they hear progress is being made, that the project stalled. »blog.comcast.com/2011/11/ipv6-de···ogy.html