5242E IPv6 Capable ? I have a 5242E modem with crippled BHell firmware and I am not too familiar with this change from IPv4 to IPv6 protocol. So is this router/modem IPv6 compliant or do I need a new router/modem soon or does this upgrade not affect the average DSL consumer ?
IPv4 is a 32bit addressing scheme while IPv6 is 128bit. IPv5, 64bit does not exist.
It is extremely doubtful if any Speedstream/Siemens modems will ever work with IVP6.
These modems are classed as obsolete. The modems likely do not have enough memory for IVP6 and the firmware would need to be upgraded. The design of these modems is about 10 years old and the cost to rewrite the firmware will be expensive since the hardware used is obsolete and the programmers being used for modern devices would have to learn how to code the legacy products.
Bell has only been issuing 2Wire modems for new installations and also replacement modems for the last couple of years. Newer modems sync better in noisy environments, which saves company money for tech support and service calls.
Starting late last year, Bell began rolling out version 6 firmware for 2Wire modems replacing version 5 firmware. The 2Wire is IVP6 capable.
said by RickStep:Actually, it does exist. It's not known as IPv5, but its packets use the IP version of 5. It's defined by RFC1819 (and a few RFCs before that). It's a connection-oriented protocol using IPv4 addressing, but is for encapsulation and transfer of time-sensitive data (VoIP, video etc.). My MPLS switch has options for the Internet Stream Protocol, so it does exist.
IPv5, 64bit does not exist.
I'm confused why you say IPv5 uses 64-bit addressing when it uses standard IPv4 addressing (unless you thought it was some sort of progression (32 → 64 → 128)).
I hope Bell hurries up and deploys (or at least starts testing) IPv6. It's the incumbents that will define the IPv6 rollout in Canada. If they all get on board and work relatively quickly, I see no reason why we can't have IPv6 working smoothly. Of course, you do raise the point of outdated CPE, but like you said, Bell can OOB update the 2wire modem/routers, and hopefully they offer some option for other modems to upgrade their firmware (even if it's to a default, non-Bell firmware).
reply to EdT586
The modem's built in router is not, but if you use an external router that supports it, it will work just fine in bridge mode.
GO LEAFS GO!
reply to squircle
said by squircle:There is no need to depend on Bell for IPv6, some GAS-ISPs are already offering dual-stack on DSL, all you need is to put your IPv4-only in bridged mode ("dumb modem") and use an IPv6-capable router behind it to handle dual-stack PPPoE... or without router, an OS with dual-stack support in their PPPoE dialer.
I hope Bell hurries up and deploys (or at least starts testing) IPv6. It's the incumbents that will define the IPv6 rollout in Canada.
TSI subscribers have had the option of signing up for TSI's IPv6 "beta" for two years, maybe more. I started using their IPv6 as a free throttling bypass alternative when MLPPP became an extra-fee option... seemed to be working fine provided the torrents I was downloading had some fast IPv6 peers/seeds, which rarely was the case.
said by InvalidError:I know, I was one of the first. However, it's up to the incumbent providers to ensure that their networks are IPv6. You can't just have IPv6 as an opt-in option for those in the know. I guarantee that the vast majority of Bell, Cogeco, Rogers, Eastlink, Telus etc. subscribers either don't know or don't care what IPv6 is, and they don't see the need for it. It has to happen smoothly, and it has to be the default. Dual-stack needs to be available to everybody. I think the success of the v6 rollout can be measured by customer feedback. If the phones aren't ringing off the hook with "my internet is broken!", it'll be successful.
TSI subscribers have had the option of signing up for TSI's IPv6 "beta" for two years, maybe more.
Right now, one of my ISPs is Cogeco, and all of my v6 packets travel through a Hurricane Electric 6in4 tunnel through TorIX. My v6 latency, load on my router and v6 speed (because of fragmentation for its v4 travel and whatnot) would be greatly reduced. If Cogeco's network was native IPv6, I wouldn't have to tunnel and run into these problems.