dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
51
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
Westell 6100
Cisco PIX 501

cramer to SteveB

Premium Member

to SteveB

Re: I need to change my network addresses for Uverse expansion?

said by SteveB :

I just spoke to AT&T again. I got somebody who was fairly knowledgeable and he says that on July 6th, they are switching over to IPV6. Also, the reason for changing from a 10.x.x.x network to 192.168.x.x is because IPV6 can't nat to that segment.

Excuse me while I clean the Mt.Dew off my monitor.

That is the single largest load of horse shit I've yet seen. They are not "switching to IPv6" -- AT&T's dumbass plan for IPv6 is 6rd TUNNELING. (even AT&T COMMERCIAL services have laughable IPv6 deployment) IPv6 and IPv4 are completely different networks. There is no "NAT" involved... v4 and v6 hosts cannot directly communicate; it takes application aware proxies, no amount of header rewriting can make the two compatible.

The only plausable reason for restricting 10/8 is the (idiotic) deployment of Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) inwhich customers no longer are assigned public IP addresses. (from the same people who hand out static /29's for free to anyone who asks... this makes no sense.) CGN requires some rather beafy hardware, and opens them to a slew of legal issues (tracking the illegal activities of the now-nat'd customers.) This will piss off a lot of people, and *will* cost them customers.

Rangersfan
@sbcglobal.net

Rangersfan

Anon

Here are a couple of interesting articles:

»www.lightreading.com/doc ··· d=208857

»www.networkworld.com/com ··· de/44989

SteveB
@portla.org

SteveB to cramer

Anon

to cramer
OK, so you're not sure exactly what they are doing either, so who is, or how do we find out what's happening July 6th? If the guy I talked to gave me bad info, where do I ( we ) go from there? I'm not waiting til July just find out what happens...

RexHavoc
@sbcglobal.net

RexHavoc

Anon

I was just told by AT&T 2nd tier support that this is indeed CGN, and that nat'ed customers will no longer be assigned a public IP address. You will be at least one layer, if not two layers down, which seems to also mean that access to services inside your home network will not be available to you outside, as well as breaking VPN. They have told me that for $15/month I can get a private IP address. Maybe that is the key here, getting another $15/month? SIGH. Maybe times to switch back to Comcast!
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
Westell 6100
Cisco PIX 501

cramer to SteveB

Premium Member

to SteveB
I would say very few know exactly what is going on, and even fewer why. The tech talking about IPv6 was just making shit up to get you off the phone. (far too common in call centers.)

IPv4 and IPv6 are as functionally different as Appletalk and IPX. Dual stack is not "the simplest way", it's pretty much the *only* way... You either run an IPv6 stack or not; to talk to other v6 hosts, you have to run a v6 stack. v4 talks to v4; v6 talks to v6. If I'm speaking Gaelic and you're speaking Swahili, we aren't communicating.
said by RexHavoc :

I was just told by AT&T 2nd tier support that this is indeed CGN...

That's the only thing that makes sense. But not when you notice how many people have been *GIVEN* static address blocks simply by asking. Now they're trotting out the $15/month "static IP" service that used to be available on DSL??? (which they dropped several years ago -- residential DSL customers cannot(?) get a static IP for any price.)

wayjac
MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy

wayjac

MVM

Residential DSL customers can purchase a block of 5 static public ip's
Residential DSL customers in the bellsouth region cannot obtain a single static public ip
Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL

Zoder

Member

There's a lot of FUD in this thread. With only 6 weeks to go you would think David can get us the facts. If you're reading this, will you post here and let us know if we'll still have a public accessible IP address?
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
Westell 6100
Cisco PIX 501

cramer to wayjac

Premium Member

to wayjac
Their policies have changed several times over the years. *I* have a single static IP as part of my residential dsl service. It was an included extra to "Extreme 6.0" back when I ordered it -- $15/month otherwise. Some time after that, they stopped including it for free by default -- everyone had to specifically ask and pay for it. Some time after that, they stopped offering static addresses entirely. After that, they were available again if you knew to ask for it.

Uverse, apparently, has always been an if-you-know-to-ask. And I've never heard of anyone being charged for their static address block. Something that costs business customers $30/mo, and isn't offered to residential dsl at all, is free to every residential uverse account. (or *was*)

wayjac
MVM
join:2001-12-22
Indy

wayjac

MVM

said by cramer:

Their policies have changed several times over the years

This is normal when one company is purchased by another
said by cramer:

*I* have a single static IP as part of my residential dsl service. It was an included extra to "Extreme 6.0" back when I ordered it -- $15/month otherwise

Bellsouth had a single static public ip option, att has no option like this that's why it's not available now
said by cramer:

Uverse, apparently, has always been an if-you-know-to-ask. And I've never heard of anyone being charged for their static address block. Something that costs business customers $30/mo, and isn't offered to residential dsl at all, is free to every residential uverse account. (or *was*)

Uverse has never had a no cost single static public ip option, but the uverse public ip hardly ever changes
uverse subscribers can order a block of static public ip's and it is not a free option

mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20

1 recommendation

mackey to Zoder

Premium Member

to Zoder
said by Zoder:

There's a lot of FUD in this thread. With only 6 weeks to go you would think David can get us the facts. If you're reading this, will you post here and let us know if we'll still have a public accessible IP address?

Even "an executive director from the 'Office of the President at AT&T'" wouldn't give a guy from Network World a straight answer saying only "With all Internet service providers facing a shortage of IPv4 addresses, we are upgrading U-verse Internet customers' equipment to help us maximize the use of these addresses." He then digs up an article from 2010 stating "An AT&T executive did speak at Google's IPv6 Implementers Conference in June, explaining that the carrier will transition its broadband network to IPv6 using 6rd, a technique for tunneling IPv6 traffic over an IPv4 network that was pioneered by French ISP Free. / 'With our high-speed Internet access -- the U-verse and DSL product sets -- our plan is to go carrier-grade NAT to reduce IPv4 consumption and 6rd for IPv6 end content over our network ... We're not doing a trial yet. Not until 2011."

So, is this network address update needed for a video service? Perhaps. The signs are pointing to CGN however...

/M

camper
just visiting this planet
Premium Member
join:2010-03-21
Bethel, CT

camper to Zoder

Premium Member

to Zoder
said by Zoder:

There's a lot of FUD in this thread. With only 6 weeks to go you would think David can get us the facts. If you're reading this, will you post here and let us know if we'll still have a public accessible IP address?

I wouldn't call it FUD, as FUD usually is intentional disinformation by a company towards its customers (as perfected by IBM decades ago).

What I see here is an information vacuum that is being filled by AT&T's customers trying to figure out what is about to happen to them.

gerick
join:2001-01-17
San Antonio, TX
Google Wifi
Obihai OBi200

1 recommendation

gerick to mackey

Member

to mackey
I would bet money that CGN/LSN is coming. Just don't know when.

Also, I see that World IPv6 Launch is just a few days away. Home networking equipment manufacturers, and web companies around the world are coming together to permanently enable IPv6 for their products and services by 6 June 2012. And ATT is one of the participants.

mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20

1 recommendation

mackey

Premium Member

said by gerick:

I would bet money that CGN/LSN is coming. Just don't know when.

My magic 8-ball is telling me it's going to be on or about July 6th
said by gerick:

Also, I see that World IPv6 Launch is just a few days away. Home networking equipment manufacturers, and web companies around the world are coming together to permanently enable IPv6 for their products and services by 6 June 2012. And ATT is one of the participants.

The surprising thing is of the big 4 (Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner, AT&T), AT&T is the only one to have deployed IPv6 to a significant percentage of customers, and of the 2 who've deployed at all (Comcast, AT&T), T's the only one to offer something bigger then a single /64. I really did not expect that.

/M
Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL

1 recommendation

Zoder to mackey

Member

to mackey
said by mackey:

Even "an executive director from the 'Office of the President at AT&T'" wouldn't give a guy from Network World a straight answer saying only "With all Internet service providers facing a shortage of IPv4 addresses, we are upgrading U-verse Internet customers' equipment to help us maximize the use of these addresses." He then digs up an article from 2010 stating "An AT&T executive did speak at Google's IPv6 Implementers Conference in June, explaining that the carrier will transition its broadband network to IPv6 using 6rd, a technique for tunneling IPv6 traffic over an IPv4 network that was pioneered by French ISP Free. / 'With our high-speed Internet access -- the U-verse and DSL product sets -- our plan is to go carrier-grade NAT to reduce IPv4 consumption and 6rd for IPv6 end content over our network ... We're not doing a trial yet. Not until 2011."

So, is this network address update needed for a video service? Perhaps. The signs are pointing to CGN however...

/M

Thanks for the link. I guess I was too optimistic that AT&T would be forthcoming since we're going to find out after July 6 anyways. So why be so cagey?

mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20

1 recommendation

mackey

Premium Member

I can think of 2 possibilities:

1) Marketing is trying to keep people from worrying about whether or not their internet connection will work with CGN and start looking into other providers. Nobody wants to be the first one to implement something like this; it's gonna be TWC's caps all over again.

2) Management has not finalized a decision and is preparing just in case they decide to implement it

/M
Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL

Zoder

Member

I have to remote in for work. I'll be more pissed if I try to do so one day and it doesn't work than having advanced notice and being able to make alternate plans such as switching isps. I feel bad for the phone reps that day if it does happen.