IPv6 Ignorance

[Jeroen Massar]

On 2012-09-18 10:54 , Elmar K. Bins wrote:
> lists at quux.de (Jens Link) wrote:
> 
>> There are rumors that the  big players like Deutsche Telekom and Kabel
>> Deutschland are ready to give IPv6 to end users. They are just not
>> willing to. So: Ask your providers support. Again and again!
> 
> Yeah, yeah, you german territorials ;)
> I've found exactly two v6 capable providers for Austria on the sixxs site,
> and none of them comes even close to offering end customer DSL in Vienna.
> 
> So carry on whining over something you can easily change... ;)

Austria indeed seems to a bit dark on the IPv6 side, call around if you
want that to change...


I am still wondering why native or ISP-provided-IPv6 is so important.

I've been happily using tunneled IPv6 for more than 10 years already and
never had a real issue with it except when some routing or a box was
broken somewhere, which just meant I did not have IPv6 or worked around
it otherwise (eg locally nullroute the destination prefix so that I got
a !N and then connectivity falled back to IPv4, which I have not had to
do for quite some time now which shows the quality of the IPv6 network
nowadays).


Swisscom, which is my VDSL provider (and doing a great job at it, except
for the high price compared to the rest of Europe... but I can't
complain further about it as that is how the Swiss market is) provides
6rd[*], even as production nowadays, which thus is proto-41 based.

If I would use that though I would get an MTU of 1280 (instead of 1480
that I have now configured) and a dynamic IPv6 prefix.

Now why would I bother switching to that if that is the offer? :)

Still waiting for true native IPv6 and static addresses for the simple
end-user, I like my working reverses, makes logs so pretty and it is
also so useful to not have to reconfigure forward DNS every once in a while.

Greets,
 Jeroen

--

[*] = http://labs.swisscom.ch/en/node/692/

oh and one gets a /60, not that that matters much actually, as that is
good enough(tm) address-space wise.

Oh and it does not matter for latency:
$ traceroute  6rd.swisscom.com
traceroute to 6rd.swisscom.com (193.5.122.254), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
 1  eternity (198.18.99.41)  0.415 ms  0.222 ms  0.266 ms
...
 8  i69lss-006-gig0-0-0.bb.ip-plus.net (138.187.138.197)  24.556 ms *
24.573 ms

$ traceroute chgva01.sixxs.net
traceroute to chgva01.sixxs.net (46.20.243.4), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
 1  eternity (198.18.99.41)  0.486 ms  0.219 ms  0.212 ms
...
14  chgva01.sixxs.net (46.20.243.4)  24.705 ms  25.141 ms  24.599 ms

Few more hops but the same latency. Likely the only thing is that
Swisscom capacity is a bit bigger than that of IP-MAX ;)