your moderator at work
hidden : Off topic hidden : Friendly delete hidden : Friendly delete
|
1 edit
2 recommendations |
to connections
Re: IPv6 Update 6RD is not 6over4 or 6to4 or a tunnel-broker service. The RFC is dated 2010 and it was derived from older technology by Free.fr if I am not mistaken.
It is tunnelling yes, but inherently superior when and because the operator providing you with connectivity is also providing you 6RD services. HE-type tunnels are cumbersome because the network path can diverge greatly by address family, whereas an ISP can provide a BR closer to you, and operates it himself.
If I had a choice between an ISP with:
1) no IPv6 2) IPv6 with a HE-type tunnel off-network 3) 6RD
I will and would choose 3 every time.
Again, Kudos to Start. And I am not a customer, due to geography.
|
|
SeeDrs join:2011-03-10 Chatham, ON |
to rocca
The youtube issue with "The uploader has not made this video available in your country" is no longer an issue. Adam |
|
roccaStart.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON |
rocca
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 9:47 pm
Excellent. |
|
damir join:2013-12-12 CANADA |
damir
Member
2014-Mar-20 1:50 pm
Any1 using Kaspersky Antivirus with IPV6 enabled? |
|
1 recommendation |
connections to martyb1
Anon
2014-Mar-20 3:57 pm
to martyb1
said by martyb1:6RD is not 6over4 or 6to4 or a tunnel-broker service. The RFC is dated 2010 and it was derived from older technology by Free.fr if I am not mistaken.
It is tunnelling yes, but inherently superior when and because the operator providing you with connectivity is also providing you 6RD services. HE-type tunnels are cumbersome because the network path can diverge greatly by address family, whereas an ISP can provide a BR closer to you, and operates it himself. That doesn't mean anything. Its still an inferior transition mechanism. said by martyb1:If I had a choice between an ISP with:
1) no IPv6 2) IPv6 with a HE-type tunnel off-network 3) 6RD
I will and would choose 3 every time. For me this doesn't make a difference. They're still not providing native IPv6 support. To the user base they're still an IPv4 only ISP. |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON
1 recommendation |
Gone
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 4:01 pm
said by connections :For me this doesn't make a difference.
|
|
damir join:2013-12-12 CANADA |
damir
Member
2014-Mar-20 4:07 pm
LoL , good one Gone. |
|
TypeS join:2012-12-17 London, ON
1 recommendation |
to connections
So then go start up a ISP and show everyone else how to roll out IPv6 "natively". |
|
roccaStart.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON
1 recommendation |
rocca
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 4:31 pm
Rolling out IPv6 with a new ISP is much easier, retrofitting almost 20 years of embedded systems on the other hand is a little trickier. Regardless, not sure what they think a better transitional technology would be (stateless tunnels are pretty freaking awesome) but at this point I don't really care as it's obviously trolling. They've said their piece, I disagree as does the majority of the planet, so we can move on as this thread is about those using our IPv6 beta. |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 4:36 pm
I for one have never been party to the 'I need IPv6 now now now!!!!!!!!!' crowd, but I will be the first to admit that having AAAA records that point to the IPv6 addresses on my home LAN has proven useful for RDPing into those machines from other IPv6-enabled networks, like what I'm doing right now. |
|
1 recommendation |
to connections
said by connections :That doesn't mean anything. Its still an inferior transition mechanism. you need to start supporting your arguments. Simply stating it is "inferior" is not relevant. Out of all the "transition mecanisms", I personally think it is the most useful. Native IPv6 is the end game, not a "transition", therefore I am eager to read your criticism about 6RD in practical terms. |
|
martyb1
1 recommendation |
to rocca
quote: but at this point I don't really care as it's obviously trolling. They've said their piece, I disagree as does the majority of the planet, so we can move on as this thread is about those using our IPv6 beta.
yes, 6RD testing has shown me its pretty interesting from an operational standpoint. I would argue that the more 6RD and native access there is the better, since 6RD helps to skew the IPv6 adoption rate in an upwards direction, eventually benefitting everyone. |
|
|
|
to connections
said by connections :For me this doesn't make a difference. They're still not providing native IPv6 support. To the user base they're still an IPv4 only ISP. So what will native support get us that 6RD doesn't? |
|
|
to rocca
said by rocca:It's expected private beta will run a couple weeks and then public beta will be available So when can us commoners have access to 6RD ? Right now I can get an IPv6 address but no DNS. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada 2 edits
1 recommendation |
to rocca
I'm a complete N00B to this. OK, so based on your screen grab, it looks like IPv6 = 8 groups of 4 hexadecimal digits, yes ? Dat's a lotta characters ! I have not yet read the thread, so please excuse if already asked and answered. Questions :(1) How long before the existing users of the Internet get their collective arms twisted into using IPv6 ? (2) How far back in Windows versions will patches go to support it ? (IOW, when do the PC makers begin the FUD to get us all to scrounge money to spend to replace most of the personal computers, as well as the consumer routers and modems in the world ?) |
|
roccaStart.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON
1 recommendation |
to penman4
said by penman4:So when can us commoners have access to 6RD ? Right now I can get an IPv6 address but no DNS. I'm aiming for early next week. |
|
rocca
1 recommendation |
to Davesnothere
1) I suspect IPv4 will be around for a long while still. 2) I don't recall what the first version of Windows to support IPv6 was, but XP does and I don't think anyone is going back further than that, at least I hope not. |
|
damir join:2013-12-12 CANADA |
to rocca
said by rocca:Google latency will be higher for a few days, we're working with them to get our IPv6 peering up. Should be done this week I'd expect. hey rocca, do you expect this to be completed this week, or we are looking into next week for this? Thanks! |
|
roccaStart.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON |
rocca
Premium Member
2014-Mar-21 1:04 pm
I'm surprised it's not done yet, just waiting for Google currently. I nudged them again yesterday. |
|
damir join:2013-12-12 CANADA |
damir
Member
2014-Mar-21 1:12 pm
Perfect sir! Thank you |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada
1 recommendation |
to rocca
said by rocca:1) I suspect IPv4 will be around for a long while still.
2) I don't recall what the first version of Windows to support IPv6 was, but XP does and I don't think anyone is going back further than that, at least I hope not. I see IPv6 named on my Vista PC in the default network settings, but not on an XP beast. Would it be necessary to manually ADD this to XP ? |
|
2 recommendations |
toache
Anon
2014-Mar-21 3:11 pm
said by Davesnothere:said by rocca:1) I suspect IPv4 will be around for a long while still.
2) I don't recall what the first version of Windows to support IPv6 was, but XP does and I don't think anyone is going back further than that, at least I hope not. I see IPv6 named on my Vista PC in the default network settings, but not on an XP beast. Would it be necessary to manually ADD this to XP ? Windows XP SP 2 supports IPv6 but you have to manually install it. Plus some more fiddling for dhcp. see: » ipv6int.net/systems/wind ··· pv6.html |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada
1 recommendation |
Thanks |
|
roccaStart.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON
1 recommendation |
rocca
Premium Member
2014-Mar-22 2:24 pm
We have opened up the Beta to any of our customers.
Please keep in mind it's still beta and support is currently limited to this forum, but no need to register to try it out now.
We are still waiting for Google IPv6 peering which I expect will happen early next week, but most of our other peers are up with IPv6.
Thanks. |
|
SimplePandaBSD Premium Member join:2003-09-22 Montreal, QC
1 recommendation |
to martyb1
said by martyb1:6RD is not 6over4 or 6to4 or a tunnel-broker service. The RFC is dated 2010 and it was derived from older technology by Free.fr if I am not mistaken. 6rd can be thought of as an automated (or more or less automated in the case of Start's implementation as you need to statically configure it) configuration mechanism for standard encapsulation (IP protocol 41). Indeed you can make any 6in4 capable router (like an Airport Extreme, for example) work with 6rd with a bit of extra configuration (calculating your prefix based on your assigned address, etc). So fundamentally yes, 6rd is a tunnel technology. The idea is that it's a "better" tunnel technology because the transit from you to your tunnel broker / relay is controlled by the provider and is only a few hops at most away. |
|
florin join:2006-03-23 Burlington, ON
2 recommendations |
to rocca
New customer here - just transitioned from cCable (business) to 60/10.
Congratulations Rocca and the team, the experience so far (sales, shipping, provisioning, follow-up) is excellent.
As of now, I am also on IPv6:
Your IPv4 address on the public Internet appears to be 108.170.x.x Your IPv6 address on the public Internet appears to be 2600:16f6:x:x:x:x:x:x Your Internet Service Provider (ISP) appears to be START-CA - Start Communications Since you have IPv6, we are including a tab that shows how well you can reach other IPv6 sites. [more info]
It appears that you use a managed tunnel mechanism, 6RD, to transport IPv6 over IPv4. [more info]
Good news! Your current configuration will continue to work as web sites enable IPv6. Your DNS server (possibly run by your ISP) appears to have IPv6 Internet access. Your readiness score 10/10 for your IPv6 stability and readiness, when publishers are forced to go IPv6 only
---
latency to google is ~36ms.
Good job! |
|
roccaStart.ca Premium Member join:2008-11-16 London, ON
1 recommendation |
rocca
Premium Member
2014-Mar-23 1:13 pm
Excellent, welcome aboard and thanks for the feedback. Latency to Google should also improve shortly once our IPv6 peering with them is complete. |
|