CGNat enabled again after house move...

Forums › Spark New Zealand (including Skinny and BigPipe) › CGNat enabled again after house move...

1 | 2

SirHumphreyAppleby

2844 posts

Uber Geek

#1233424 9-Feb-2015 14:16

BigPipeNZ: Particularly answering questions like: What is it about v6 that you really want to do that can't be done on v4?

My reasons...

1/ With IPv6 we can assign IPs to individual systems. No need for port mapping and NAT, which as you know, is just a hack anyway. Technically, we can do this with IPv4 as well, but not on Bigpipe (subnets, please... I'm more than happy to pay $45 for each IP, including the network/broadcast addresses if you could make this happen). Allows the use of non-NAT aware protocols, and multiple certificates on HTTPS based on IP etc. If nothing else, it makes remote access really, really easy... it's not fun setting up SSH tunnels and port forwarding all over the place when I'm on a slow (or worse, expensive) wireless connection half way around the world.

2/ Multiple subnets on connections (requires >/64 allocation). I have a /48 assignment at present, and that allows me to partition my network between client systems, servers, and wireless devices.

3/ Privacy. Temporary addressing allows separation between incoming and outgoing requests. This is essentially what I want to achieve with IPv4 subnets. Browsing to a Website using IPv6 won't expose my domain name, and therefore WHOIS information, to the outside world. Granted, this doesn't happen now, but only because Bigpipe failed to set the PTR when I requested my static IP... I really should get that fixed.

4/ Stateless configuration. Do I need to explain why that is so awesome?

5/ Bigpipe is fast, but an increasing portion of my traffic is slowed down by tunneling IPv6. This reflects badly on Bigpipe.

6/ IPv6 uptake is only slow because nobody has it. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

I'd be interested to hear what justification other users come up with.

Lorenceo

904 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1234338 10-Feb-2015 20:59

BigPipeNZ: Particularly answering questions like: What is it about v6 that you really want to do that can't be done on v4?

Access to certain servers for free, without being a customer of a certain provider, or paying for access via v4.
As SirHumphreyAppleby has mentioned, tunnelling is a lot slower than native v6. It also leaves less opportunity for traffic to be meddled with along the way.

All Google and Facebook content is available over v6, and there's a slow trend towards more v6.
There'll come a point where deploying additional CGNAT equipment to meet demand will cost more than deploying v6. The more providers that do it via choice rather than by being forced into it, the better IMO.

cg

34 posts

Geek

Trusted

#1235719 11-Feb-2015 15:19

I was in the same boat, moved house with the same plan and lost my PublicIP without being previously told about it before moving.
Having then moved and noticed I was back on CGNat, (apt name for me huh!), I was told I had to use a Static IP as Public IP was no longer offered.

I did consent to the $45 charge and am now on a static, silly me I guess. :-)

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1235752 11-Feb-2015 15:48

SirHumphreyAppleby:
BigPipeNZ: Particularly answering questions like: What is it about v6 that you really want to do that can't be done on v4?

My reasons...

1/ With IPv6 we can assign IPs to individual systems. No need for port mapping and NAT, which as you know, is just a hack anyway. Technically, we can do this with IPv4 as well, but not on Bigpipe (subnets, please... I'm more than happy to pay $45 for each IP, including the network/broadcast addresses if you could make this happen). Allows the use of non-NAT aware protocols, and multiple certificates on HTTPS based on IP etc. If nothing else, it makes remote access really, really easy... it's not fun setting up SSH tunnels and port forwarding all over the place when I'm on a slow (or worse, expensive) wireless connection half way around the world.

2/ Multiple subnets on connections (requires >/64 allocation). I have a /48 assignment at present, and that allows me to partition my network between client systems, servers, and wireless devices.

3/ Privacy. Temporary addressing allows separation between incoming and outgoing requests. This is essentially what I want to achieve with IPv4 subnets. Browsing to a Website using IPv6 won't expose my domain name, and therefore WHOIS information, to the outside world. Granted, this doesn't happen now, but only because Bigpipe failed to set the PTR when I requested my static IP... I really should get that fixed.

4/ Stateless configuration. Do I need to explain why that is so awesome?

5/ Bigpipe is fast, but an increasing portion of my traffic is slowed down by tunneling IPv6. This reflects badly on Bigpipe.

6/ IPv6 uptake is only slow because nobody has it. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

I'd be interested to hear what justification other users come up with.

It's very clearly Bigpipe isn't the product for you.

You're clearly not the target market for Bigpipe, and very clearly you're in need of a business focused ISP that allows customisation, not a residential one.

Bigpipe is the cheapest offering in the market for a reason. You can't complain about it's offering because it has not, and probably never will meet your requirements.

SirHumphreyAppleby

2844 posts

Uber Geek

#1235768 11-Feb-2015 16:12

sbiddle:
Bigpipe is the cheapest offering in the market for a reason. You can't complain about it's offering because it has not, and probably never will meet your requirements.

Exactly where am I complaining about the services offered by Bigpipe?

I haven't. Period.

tnaseem

82 posts

Master Geek

#1236627 12-Feb-2015 14:55

cg: I was in the same boat, moved house with the same plan and lost my PublicIP without being previously told about it before moving.
Having then moved and noticed I was back on CGNat, (apt name for me huh!), I was told I had to use a Static IP as Public IP was no longer offered.

I did consent to the $45 charge and am now on a static, silly me I guess. :-)

Oh I don't know. $45 is a pretty good deal for it. I might even opt for it myself. Saves faffing around with DynDNS and the like.

Actually, I wasn't hoping for much when I moaned about being back on CGNat on this thread. But I guess it pays to moan every now and then :)

BigPipe are always pretty cool when it comes to their support it has to be said.

1 | 2