Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 
Beccara
1473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 517

ID Verified

  #430675 24-Jan-2011 18:48
Send private message

If you want to use v6 now I would use a 3rd party tunnel like Sixxs with ACS's Wellington POP.

There are a couple of major US isp's that have either private trials or public ones include a major cell carrier. I would be surprised if Telecom didn't have some kind of internal team working on it but when any kind of public trials will occur is anyone's guess, They may be trying to get CGN/NAT46 in place before they do trials



nigelj
856 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125


  #430685 24-Jan-2011 19:17
Send private message

optimumtact: Thanks everyone for the replies. It's interesting to see the differing viewpoints on the dates for when Telecom needs to move to IPv6. I am just wondering as we are seeing a number of major ISP's in America (Comcast being the first that springs to mind) beginning to think about/shift to an IPv6 Solution. Wouldn't do for us to get left behind.

Of course you can get IPv6 via teredo now on windows machines and I have been visiting some sites in IPV6 and it is quite slow due too the encapsulation, native IPv6 support from telecom would be nice :) .

edit: On that note, how many IP's will they allocate per account? There has been some talk on other forums about this and they seem to agree that there will be a fair number of IP addresses assigned to each account with the ISP (Just because there are so many addresses and it's easier on the ISP's routing tables.)


To answer your question, realistically, who knows what size publicly routable prefix the ISPs will assign to their customers? I don't think anyone but the ISPs do to be honest.

Personally?  I doubt they are going to be wasteful like HE.net and throw /48's to anyone that wants them, but I hope NZ ISPs don't just say a /64 will be enough.  I'm hoping that ISPs will do say a /60 (that allows ~16 /64 local subnets which should be more than enough for even the most complex home networks ;) without been wasteful).

Basically, /64 is the smallest subnet you can get that supports the Router Advertisement (RA) auto addressing (which personally I prefer over the idea of using DHCPv6 for a home network), although that may not be ideal as it seems sending DNS over RA replies is not really standardised, and while a /62 may be better sized, complexities over addressing arise, /60 seems to be a decent size + allows identification of networks.

But really it comes down to how they do it from an infrastructure point of view though.  Just my 'wishlist' defines a /60 instead as a reasonable size (i.e.:  2001:0DB8:AAAA:AAAX:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX  ,  the first part is the initial /32 assigned to the ISP/Telecom, the A's are determined by the ISP to create a unique /60 for each customer (which would create about 268 million /60's) , and the X's are the hexadecimal bits (from the /60) that I can play with.)

1 | 2 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic








Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.