IPv6 Performance Revisited | Hacker News Reader

IPv6 Performance Revisited

blog.apnic.net

62 pointsokket28 comments

Few charts to look at:

20% ipv6 adoption worldwide: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

and per country data (Greece at 33%): https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-...

Belgium at 52%.

Some day my ISP may support IPv6 natively, but today is not that day. I think I'm approaching the 10 year anniversary of my HE tunnel broker account, and that's just sad.

IPv6 is one of the things that Comcast actually does right. I can't believe how slow some of the other ISPs are at adopting it.

Shoving IPv6 into the DOCSIS3 spec was really forward looking for the industry.

Meanwhile Verizon's only visible contribution to getting IPv6 on FiOS has been to delete their IPv6 on FiOS FAQ.

It's a crying shame that a service born in 2005 (10 years after RFC 1883 was finalized!) apparently has no transition plan for IPv6. Even if it wasn't enabled at launch, the network should have been designed for v6 support from the start.

Kind of reminds me of Python 3 migration, no one was willing to do it until running 2.7 became bigger and bigger hassle.

And even then people rarely looked ahead and try to make their code forward compatible.

At least it looks like Py3 was finally accepted.

I believe that IPv6 is a threat to Verizon's business model. Without net neutrality, V can be a paid gatekeeper to centralized services; IPv6 is a tool useful for connecting decentralized resources, and so erode's one of V's revenue sources.

I beg to differ. I've got Comcast in the PNW, and their IPv6 stack on Business class is atrocious. A short list of the issues I've had/am currently experiencing:

- Account is registered for a /56, their router only responds to requests for a /59

- Once my CPE is configured for that /59, routing from anything smaller than that /59 is just dropped on the ground (no delegation to/from /64s, etc, is allowed)

- significant investigation later, the root cause is because I also have a /29 static v4 block on my router. Removing the v4 block from the Comcast end, everything works great (as a /59). As soon as the Comcast equipment receives the static v4 config, v6 delegation grinds to a halt

- Comcast Business Support is WOEFULLY under-trained on v6. Talking about v6 netblocks gets me strange stares and "But I see your /29 on the account, is that what you're talking about?"

- Comcast line-managers have told me on multiple occasions, "Oh, if static-v4/v6 doesn't work, then it's just not supported. Sorry, just take your business elsewhere if static is important to you"

Comcast consumer lines work great. You get a /60, it works, end of story.

Disagree. Unlike their IPv4 setup, where the IP rarely changes, the IPv6 address constantly changes for no apparently reason. This makes it hard to whitelist IPs or to set up an internal IPv6 network.

I ended up getting an IPv6 /48 from Hurricane because of the hassles. That works great (other than having to force Netflix to IPv4 because of their dumb IP block).

If Comcast offered static IPv6 (NOT via business class), and more than a /60 (/58 at least), that would make it "work great".

For now, it doesn't.

My ISP supports it natively up to my router, but then my shiny new eero Wi-Fi network fails to support it.

You made me curious, I've had mine since Feb 2011. So 6 years for me.

You hove no idea how much I would love to adopt IPv6 in my home network, but I can't find an affordable switch that handles IPv6 routing (or, if it does, can do it in hardware). This is really going to be a big bottleneck for adoption in home and small business markets, even if CableOne supported IPv6 I couldn't deploy it in my aunts shop without a rather large investment - meanwhile a dumb EdgeRouter X and managed TP-Link switch get the job done exceptionally well with IPv4.

Mikrotik's home products are pretty inexpensive and all support IPv6. I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for (L2 switch, L3 switch, or L2 switch + router). L2 switches obviously are IPv4/6-agnostic, and L3 switches are typically overkill for a home network, so I'm assuming L2 switch + router. Mikrotik has a gigabit switch with a decently performing (IPv6-capable) router in the same package for $60 [1]. I've been running my whole home network (gigabit LAN + WiFi, 50 Mbps IPv6 WAN via HE) on one of these [2] which go for $130.

From your other comment it seems you are actually looking for an L3 switch setup. You can get wire-speed routing with Mikrotik's CCR series, but those start at $425 [3]. Not sure what your budget is.

[1] https://mikrotik.com/product/RB750Gr3

[2] https://mikrotik.com/product/RB962UiGS-5HacT2HnT

[3] https://mikrotik.com/product/CCR1009-7G-1C-PC

> L3 switches are typically overkill for a home network

My home network consists of a little more than a handful of computers that need internet access, I've also got a couple dozen VM's, FreeNAS (with direct 10Gbe links to the virtualization host), and a IP phone system. It's not some enterprise network, but I still hammer the crap out of my network and take full advantage of the light L3 features available in my TP-Link switch.

I've got 12 out of 24 ports currently in use on my switch, and I'm looking to add more when I finally manage to buy a place - worst case I can split the clients off to a separate switch and use some 10Gbe uplinks, but right now that accounts for a grand total of 1 port going to my wireless access point.

$500 is in my price range, but finding something with enough ports gets expensive really quick - and it gets even worse if I need to get 2 switches (one for my lab, one for client access) plus a 10Gbe-capable router to handle traffic between them :/

Well I would not call that a "typical" home network ;)

MT's 10 Gbe-capable routers range from $500 [1] or $750 [2] for a single 10 Gbe (with 8 or 12 1 Gbe ports) to $1100 for two 10 Gbes [3]. Depending how much work you can actually push into a dumb switch I can see how costs add up.

[1] https://mikrotik.com/product/CCR1009-7G-1C-1SplusPC

[2] https://mikrotik.com/product/CCR1016-12S-1Splus

[3] https://mikrotik.com/product/CCR1036-8G-2Splus

Get a Cisco 3750-12S. $100 on Ebay (plus $10 each for the SFP 1000 Base T modules).

I have two of them (and fiber because I'm crazy). They can route IPv6 among many other things.

edgerouter lite 3 does IPv6/IPv4 dual stack just fine and the switch shouldn't be looking at IP anyways it's just keeping a table of MAC addresses.

Switches have IP routing for a reason, why make a hop off the switch to the router and back just to route between separate VLAN's? I've got four ports on my switch at home in a LAG for my FreeNAS box, having to jump out to my external router then back to traverse the separate subnets make the setup worthless.

yes most modern switches also can do routing but that's not the setup the above poster mentions. a dumb unmanaged switch doesn't even look at IP

What does 'inexpensive' mean to you? I am otherwise-supremely-happy with my commercial pfSense router, if Comcast gets their v6 poop in order I'm sure I would be even more ecstatic with it.

Around the $500 price range for 24 ports, I paid $150 for my TP-Link T1600G-28TS which is a fully managed "L2+" switch with basic Layer 3 routing functionality (but it's IPv4 only).

The netgate sg-1000 is probably an overkill for most homes and it comes in at $150. If you have a managed switch, I'm guessing it's not a standard home network setup though.

We definitely need some kind of legislation, banning IPv4 after some point of time. Say 2020. Or Maybe 2025.

We definitely need to keep legislation the hell away from network protocols.

Not necessarily. We could require by law that all ISPs provide an "industry standard" network protocol defined by a group of major internet companies.

This is how the EU defined the phone charger standard (and the industry board of phone manufacturers recently decided to switch the legal requirement from microUSB to USB-C)

The better way of doing that is to set a mandate for the government itself, resulting in adoption elsewhere.

Like the U.S. Government did [0] years ago?

[0]: https://s3.amazonaws.com/sitesusa/wp-content/uploads/sites/1...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com