<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 06/23/2014 03:58 PM, R P Herrold
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.LRH.2.03.1406231550160.23423@bjyevire.pbz"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">when one switches to a third party (Motorola 6121) cable modem
[1]. I bought mine through NewEgg, moved the coax cable to
the new unit, called TW TS and gave them the new MAC address,
rebooted, and that's about it
in this block:
2605:a000:110f:807e:xxxx:xxx:xxxx:xxxx</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yee-haw! <br>
<br>
But gotta wonder why BYOM is part of the availability equation. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.LRH.2.03.1406231550160.23423@bjyevire.pbz"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I will be experimenting, but it appears that my Apple Airport
Extreme also knows how to act as an IPv6 router for the
upstream, and to hand out assignments in the correct ipv6
delegated fashion, as well as the regular ipv4 DHCP</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I only just started running DHCPv6 on the home LAN. In that case,
it's just another Linux guest (virtual). Have been manually
assigning v6 addresses on the home LAN for the past three years. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.LRH.2.03.1406231550160.23423@bjyevire.pbz"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I failed to note the netblock delegation size, and will be
experimenting -- persistence also comes to mind. There are
some RFC's as to privacy and ipv6 out there as well</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Do share, as I'm sure you will, when you find out. <br>
I was under the impression that common residential allocation was
/64. That is, /64 to each residential customer. Your comment above
reads as if CMH TW slices out sub-allocations from
2506:a000:110f:8703::/64. Even if that is true, there's a lot of
addressing available to Columbus area TW customers. <br>
<br>
To those who are new to IPv6, <br>
this means that residential customers get thousands, ... no <i>millions</i>,
... no <i>billions</i> of IP addresses from their one connection.
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 06/24/2014 12:45 AM, Rick Hornsby wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2122A768-E43B-451B-BE32-C862F4FDFDFD@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Definitely interested to find out what you come up with. Google fiber does IPv6, but most of the residential IPv6 docs I can find assume your ISP is v4 only, and you're going to use a tunnel broker like HE.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I recommend that you <u>get a tunnel</u> if you're in any IPv4
situation, including laptop mobility. If you have IPv6 at home, but
you take your laptop/tablet to some other location (office,
traveling, local library) where you might not get an IPv6 lease,
you'll have your tunnel(s). <br>
<br>
HE works well and is popular, but SixXS is more automatic. Install
AICCU (a standard package in most Linux distros), punch in your
tunnel info to /etc/aiccu.conf, and you're ready to start the tunnel
automagically. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2122A768-E43B-451B-BE32-C862F4FDFDFD@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I know very little about v6, and even less about how to configure a router/firewall like pfsense to use v6. Sometimes feels like trying to learn the interwebs all over again.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Some of us like to think of IPv6 and IPv4 as separate networks. I
was corrected recently that the long haul and back-end interests do
their best to push v4 and v6 through the same pipes. Makes sense.
But strictly speaking, 4 and 6 *can* have different topology,
different routing. There's a reason they call it "dual stack". <br>
<br>
But the TCP layer is the same. Port 80 on v6 has the same
implications and expectations as port 80 on v4. Works. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2122A768-E43B-451B-BE32-C862F4FDFDFD@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Maybe with more residential ISPs like TW making a move, it will start to show the writing on the wall and convince big giant corp like the one I work for that the answer to running out of IPv4 space does not mean more (re)using private, and poaching public, v4 netblocks for internal address space.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Maybe it's time for another IPv6 talk at COLUG. Lots of stories to
tell. The tech is easy. Fun even. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2122A768-E43B-451B-BE32-C862F4FDFDFD@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'm told part of the problem is that our clients (hospitals mostly) have flat out said no way to IPv6.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
You are not alone. Your clients may be unaware of their own
impending needs. Your own management should think ahead. The
developers of IPv6 have worked hard for it to be invisible to
consumers. Ironically, a big chunk of <u>IT executives thinking
like consumers</u>, the decision makers don't see the need.
[sigh] Enjoy the following ... <br>
<br>
<blockquote><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v26BAlfWBm8">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v26BAlfWBm8</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Jim! Bite your tongue! :-)<br>
<br>
-- R; <><<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>