Hacker News Reader

Comment by chimeracoder | Hacker News Reader

Not that I have any choice with regards to my ISP in my area (NYC - I'm stuck with TWC), but what ISPs in the US actually provide IPv6 support for even a majority of their residential customers?

Time Warner Cable certainly doesn't, but I was surprised to find that even Verizon doesn't provide it for many (most?) of their FiOS customers.

When pressed about IPv6 support, ISPs, typically respond that very few services require it, so it's not a priority for them. But this is a catch-22 - the only reason so few services require it is that so few people have access to it!

And the people who suffer the most aren't their customers - it's people in other countries who are forced to live behind NAT because of IP address exhaustion.

For example, the entire country of Qatar shares a single IP address: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:82.148.97.69/header

View on HN

It's funny, I am in Germany, and I only have IPv6. IPv4 is provided over DS-Lite. So, things are slowly changing here and there.

"Comcast's IPv6 deployment continues to expand, over 25% of our customers are actively provisioned with native dual stack broadband! The following areas of the Comcast broadband footprint are now fully IPv6 enabled - Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, Kansas, Missouri, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Houston."

http://www.comcast6.net/

I live in a suburb of Houston and I do not have IPV6 via comcast...

Comcast has it deployed very widely. Definitely in (most of?) SF.

Note that you need an IPv6 capable cable modem & router. Recent cable modems are mostly capable, and most (all?) Apple routers are.

Yes, Comcast provides v6 PD prefix(at least in bay area), which allows every v6-capable device in your home to have a v6 address. if your router is a bit outdated and doesn't support v6 with factory firmware (as my TP-Link router), I suggest to use openwrt 12.09(dhcp6c + radvd)

I have been playing with Comcast IPv6 at home. Being able to request a /60 is great. I can have 16 x /64 subnets on my home network. This is going to be an interesting transition for a lot of people who are used to IPv4 and NAT.

If anyone has Comcast and wants to play with IPv6, I recommend setting up a pfSense firewall/router. It has been a good learning experience. http://www.pfsense.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6vT3_2PO1w

Actually Time Warner is kinda rolling out IPv6 support in a way that makes me think that it might not be too far away. I think I've even caught them live-testing features in my area, sometimes.

I can (sometimes) get an IPv6 address from them, although it appears to always be in some kind of weird non-routable mode. I don't know enough about ipv6 to say exactly what is going wrong. Once upon a time I actually managed to ping -6 some external hosts, but when I came back a day later, it stopped working. Weird.

http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/residential-home/support/t...

Is the address you're getting a fe80::/64 address?

Because that is a "link local" address that gets automatically assigned to any IPv6-enabled interface.

It appears to be semi-legit, in this block: http://myip.ms/view/ip_ranges6/60/2605:e000::_2605:e000:ffff...

I have TWC and a IPv6 tunnel from he.net. The HE tunnels are fast! Due to differences in HE/TWC peering agreements I often find that connecting to a site via IPv6 is much faster than using IPv4. I have to imagine that the NYC tunnel endpoint is fairly close to you (network wise, not geographically.) Try ping/tracerouting to tserv1.nyc4.he.net

"For example, the entire country of Qatar shares a single IP address"

Which is ridiculous of course.

Unofficially IP addresses can be bought and defacto transferred. They could certainly given a budget do that despite what it says here:

http://www.apnic.net/services/services-apnic-provides/helpde...

Ok here it is (and I also have other personal knowledge of this happening):

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-pays-no...

http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/ has some numbers for % of traffic to major sites (google, facebook, yahoo, akamai, etc) from each ISP that goes over IPv6.

Some major US ISPs: Comcast: 20.61% AT&T: 13.53% Verizon Wireless (not FiOS): 40.03% Time Warner Cable: 3.88% T-Mobile USA: 9.58% Google Fiber: 71.87%

Very large ISPs have been deploying it because it actually simplifies their internal networks (which can be too large for RFC1918 space) and because carrier grade NAT is expensive.

Here in the UK there are ISPs that will give out IPv6 allocations, but most people use `miredo`, or similar, to proved an IPv6 connection to the outside world.

I host a fairly large number of domains, and I see IPv6 traffic hovers around the 5-15% level.

Comcast has rolled out IPv6 en-masse. I have IPv6 using their service.

They have not rolled out IPv6 en-masse. I have Comcast and I do not have IPv6. They have only rolled it out to certain states, what amounts to about 25% of their customers[0] (as of December, might be much higher by now but still not 100%).

[0]: http://www.comcast6.net/index.php/8-ipv6-trial-news-and-info...

I assume "actively provisioned" doesn't just count Comcast's own network; the customer has to meet them halfway, and install an IPv6-compatible modem and router.

From that viewpoint, 25% seems quite impressive.

Ah, fair enough, I didn't think about that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com