dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2703
share rss forum feed

zaxcom

join:2008-12-26
Charlotte, NC

IPV6

Has anyone seen this rolled out. I thought TWC said by the end of the year. So far nothing in Charlotte.



mackey

join:2007-08-20
kudos:6

1 recommendation

Supposedly 1 or 2 towns somewhere in NC got it for IPv6 day, but no word otherwise. I check every few weeks here in LA and haven't seen anything yet.

/M



Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

1 recommendation

reply to zaxcom

They said:

quote:
At least 1% of our high-speed data subscribers will be able to reach IPv6 websites by June 6, 2012.
So according to wikipedia that's ~87,000 customers... which really doesn't seem like much. And they've made no promises about how long it will take to have it available to every customer.


motorola870

join:2008-12-07
Arlington, TX
kudos:3

It would be nice to know when TWC will allow the SBG6580 and ARRIS TG852 modems to have IPv6 capable firmware. I know that when Wideband (now ultimate) first came out the modems of choice were the SBG6580 and UBEE DDW3611 which TWC's website mentions IPv6 support for the later.



mackey

join:2007-08-20
kudos:6

1 recommendation

said by motorola870:

It would be nice to know when TWC will allow the SBG6580 and ARRIS TG852 modems to have IPv6 capable firmware.

You're joking, right? Even cables' IPv6 leader Comcast doesn't support IPv6 on those RGs. Once Comcast gets it, add about 2 years and that's about when TWC will get around to it.

/M

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

reply to Suit Up

said by Suit Up:

So according to wikipedia that's ~87,000 customers... which really doesn't seem like much. And they've made no promises about how long it will take to have it available to every customer.

It is better than zero customers and they have to start somewhere.


hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
kudos:9

2 recommendations

"It is better than zero customers and they have to start somewhere.'

Agreed, it is being worked on across many markets but right at this time I doubt there are 87,000 customers who know what it is!

Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by hobgoblin:

I doubt there are 87,000 customers who know what it is!

I very much doubt that.


hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
kudos:9

2 recommendations

"I very much doubt that."

Doubt all you want, this site is not a reflection of the Internet user. I would say less than 1% of the people I talk to on a daily basis have any idea what an IP address is let alone when IPV6 may be available to them. At this point in time its not relevant.

Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 edit

1 recommendation

said by hobgoblin:

Doubt all you want, this site is not a reflection of the Internet user. I would say less than 1% of the people I talk to on a daily basis have any idea what an IP address is let alone when IPV6 may be available to them. At this point in time its not relevant.

That's nice, not everyone that is aware of what IPv6 is and is interested in having IPv6 enabled service knows about DSLR or comes to this site either. There are a lot more people who are aware of IPv6 that have never even heard of DSLR.

Consider this. Comcast has only v6 enabled 50% of their CMTS's and they're at 3% of their Internet customers having v6 running. That is somewhere around 500,000 customers and that's barely scratching the surface. Once they complete the other 50% to have 100% roll out by the middle of next year they will have no problem hitting 10% and that's without doing any work to inform the "masses" about what IPv6 is.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

1 recommendation

reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

It is better than zero customers and they have to start somewhere.

Of course it's better than zero. But it's still sad that after all this time that we've known we need to switch to IPv6 that was still their goal deployment (and, yes, I know it's not just TWC who are at fault for this). This is something that they could've done at the same time as upgrading to DOCSIS 3.


TelecomEng

@rr.com
reply to zaxcom

The biggest hold up for IPv6 deployment has been vendors whose code has nasty IPv6-related bugs. Most cable companies would like to finish the roll-out of IPv6.



PCInTech
keeping art alive since 1953
Premium
join:2004-06-07
Massena, NY
kudos:9
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
reply to hobgoblin

said by hobgoblin:

"I very much doubt that."

Doubt all you want, this site is not a reflection of the Internet user. I would say less than 1% of the people I talk to on a daily basis have any idea what an IP address is let alone when IPV6 may be available to them. At this point in time its not relevant.

Hob

Having been an Internet provider myself, this is hysterical. 99% of normal users have NO clue.

DelmarPip

join:2011-10-15
South Padre Island, TX
reply to zaxcom

hey what is this ipv6 good for anyways im askin cuz i realy wanna know



Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

said by DelmarPip:

hey what is this ipv6 good for anyways im askin cuz i realy wanna know

»arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/03/ipv6/

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to DelmarPip

said by DelmarPip:

hey what is this ipv6 good for anyways im askin cuz i realy wanna know

among other things IPv4 has very limited address space.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

reply to TelecomEng

said by TelecomEng :

The biggest hold up for IPv6 deployment has been vendors whose code has nasty IPv6-related bugs. Most cable companies would like to finish the roll-out of IPv6.

Until this year the biggest hold up was both edge access equipment at the ISP side and CPE, but the CPE side of things has improved enough with most of the major vendors shipping routers with IPv6 support nowadays. On the edge access side with cable for example Cisco is pretty far behind the curve compared to some of the other CMTS vendors.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

reply to Suit Up

said by Suit Up:

Of course it's better than zero. But it's still sad that after all this time that we've known we need to switch to IPv6 that was still their goal deployment (and, yes, I know it's not just TWC who are at fault for this). This is something that they could've done at the same time as upgrading to DOCSIS 3.

I am not denying that aspect. Both from a firmware perspective and roll out perspective we should be much further ahead. There is still more than enough work going forward but enough firmware / software is ready and the core Internet connectivity between transit providers is good enough. Now is the time for more edge access networks to roll out dual-stack service. There wasn't as much movement in 2012 as I had hoped but there is a lot of testing going on even if a lot of it is not visible. We will start seeing a lot more progress in 2013.


swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

said by DelmarPip:

hey what is this ipv6 good for anyways im askin cuz i realy wanna know

among other things IPv4 has very limited address space.

The end ISP user does not care about that. What is something that Joe Schmo is going to be able to do when he gets it that he cant do now? The only reason I want IPv6 right now from TW is for the novelty effect to tinker with.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by swintec:

The end ISP user does not care about that. What is something that Joe Schmo is going to be able to do when he gets it that he cant do now? The only reason I want IPv6 right now from TW is for the novelty effect to tinker with.

I don't care if you don't value the additional address space but there are plenty of people who do and they want v6 for more than just to "tinker with".


swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

said by 34764170:

said by swintec:

The end ISP user does not care about that. What is something that Joe Schmo is going to be able to do when he gets it that he cant do now? The only reason I want IPv6 right now from TW is for the novelty effect to tinker with.

I don't care if you don't value the additional address space but there are plenty of people who do and they want v6 for more than just to "tinker with".

Okay and why is that? Why does a meaningful (read: significant) amount of residential users (my and your neighbors, families and friends) need IPv6? Why should an ISP rush this "feature" out to its residential customer base over something that markets and sells better like speed upgrades and TV features?
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

1 recommendation

said by swintec:

Why should an ISP rush this "feature" out to its residential customer base over something that markets and sells better like speed upgrades and TV features?

Because they can now assign a static IP block to everyone and thus reduce their overhead for all the John Doe requests they get from the piracy lawsuits. Thus saving them monies.

That's a joke btw, as it's really a silly question. IPv6 isn't a feature that's marketable, it's something that is designed to be a transparent change for the end user, yet enable the continued growth of the internet. If ISPs, network backbones, and equipment manufacturers had listened to the people who were telling them to prepare for the change over 10 years ago, they wouldn't have to rush it. But instead they all rested on their laurels more concerned about their current bottom line than being prepared for the future and now all of a sudden they do have to "rush" it...

mind21_98

join:2006-05-13
San Diego, CA

1 recommendation

said by Suit Up:

But instead they all rested on their laurels more concerned about their current bottom line than being prepared for the future and now all of a sudden they do have to "rush" it...

Yep. I still think they're going to roll out cgNAT before they roll out IPv6, but we'll see.


TelecomEng

@rr.com
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

On the edge access side with cable for example Cisco is pretty far behind the curve compared to some of the other CMTS vendors.

Actually, quite the opposite, in my experience. Cisco has been the most proactive in getting to full v6 compliance in their CMTS code. Other vendors, Arris for example, have been less adept at their v6 code. Supposedly this has changed with more recent code and Arris is catching up.


TelecomEng

@rr.com
reply to mind21_98

said by mind21_98:

Yep. I still think they're going to roll out cgNAT before they roll out IPv6, but we'll see.

You're likely to see them rolled out side-by-side. CGN will be used to support those folks with outdated and functional v4 routers and devices who don't upgrade for v6 capabilities.


whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

reply to swintec

said by swintec:

Okay and why is that? Why does a meaningful (read: significant) amount of residential users (my and your neighbors, families and friends) need IPv6? Why should an ISP rush this "feature" out to its residential customer base over something that markets and sells better like speed upgrades and TV features?

I think you are looking at this the wrong way. Users don't care that v6 brings PMTUD which will allow us to use jumbo frames across the internet. They don't care about openness and end-to-end connectivity of the internet.

The average (not you or I) internet user just wants things to work.

We need to look what will fail if a user does not have IPv6:

1. P2P File transfers via many chat programs (including irc and jabber). User has a v6 address, sends to v4 user.

2. Breakage due to carrier grade NAT. 2013 is going to be the year of IPv6. 2014 is the year of CGN. Geoff Huston has some good stats on why Teredo is so fail. Most of it has to do with instances where there are multiple layers of NATs.

3. Inability to access websites. There are IPv6 only sites out there already. As the price of IPv4 increases, there will be an increase of IPv6 only sites. (eg. try and get to »bin6.it , it'll work if you have teredo). Think a person who gets a $15 VPS will pay $10/mo for an IPv4 address?


Aliens
Premium
join:2002-10-09
space-time

1 recommendation

reply to zaxcom

I just posted a separate thread so as not to hijack this one or any other. I succeeded today in getting IPV6 / IPV4 dual-stack internet service working on a Time Warner connection in San Antonio, TX using a Arris TG852G modem and Windows 7 PCs. Details in that post.