Request for assistance with Verizon FIOS connection

Sat Jul 15 18:49:08 UTC 2023

Of course, I meant, “not worry about giving customer devices IPv4.”

On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 11:46 AM Crist Clark <cjc+nanog at pumpky.net> wrote:

> His IPv6 was staying up. It was only his IPv4 breaking.
>
> Maybe it’s Verizon’s way of telling you to go IPv6-only and do NAT64/DNS64
> on your home network. (Only half-joking.) Be good for them to be able to
> operate the FIOS more like the wireless and not worry about giving customer
> devices IPv6.
>
> Out of curiosity, when the IPv4 is working, is it a globally routable
> address or CGNAT?
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 10:44 AM Joe Loiacono <jloiacon at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I dunno ... I had to turn Verizon's FiOS IPv6 off because it wasn't
>> playing well with my Pulse VPN. So they are providing it now (maybe not
>> supporting it ;-)
>> On 7/15/2023 12:05 PM, Joe Klein wrote:
>>
>> As from a consumers standpoint, Verizon FIOS has published an IPv6
>> website, created a discussion forum, and stated they would soon support.
>> That was 14 years ago.
>>
>> Joe Klein
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 3:46 AM Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Matt,
>>>
>>> I missed where the OP indicated they've tried both a direct laptop
>>> connection as well as another router. I think you may have seen my reply
>>> suggesting that and thought that was the OP stating he'd done it.
>>>
>>> -mel
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Matt Corallo <nanog at as397444.net>
>>> *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2023 9:44 PM
>>> *To:* Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org>; Neil Hanlon <neil at shrug.pw>;
>>> nanog at nanog.org <nanog at nanog.org>
>>> *Subject:* Re: Request for assistance with Verizon FIOS connection
>>>
>>> OP indicated they've tried both a direct laptop connection as well as
>>> another router. That seems to
>>> meet the requirement for having ruled out his home-made router, though
>>> obviously I agree one should
>>> attempt to rule out any possible errors by doing transparent packet
>>> sniffing analyzing the problem
>>> carefully before escalating an issue. Hopefully everyone on this list
>>> knows the value of the tech on
>>> the other end of the line's time :)
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> On 7/14/23 9:07 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
>>> > Getting the FCC involved seems premature, since the OP hasn't yet
>>> ruled out a problem with his home
>>> > made router. Not that there's anything wrong with making your own
>>> router, but it seems there is a
>>> > burden of proof on the end user to demonstrate the problem isn't at
>>> with the CPE. Even a test as
>>> > simple as connecting a laptop up for a day and running pings would
>>> rule out the CPE.
>>> >
>>> >    -mel
>>> >
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces+mel=beckman.org at nanog.org> on behalf of
>>> Matt Corallo <nanog at as397444.net>
>>> > *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2023 5:46 PM
>>> > *To:* Neil Hanlon <neil at shrug.pw>; nanog at nanog.org <nanog at nanog.org>
>>> > *Subject:* Re: Request for assistance with Verizon FIOS connection
>>> > I've always had good luck with
>>> https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
>>> > <https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us>. This tends to result in
>>> > a higher-level tech getting assigned to your ticket at least at larger
>>> providers. Depending on where
>>> > you are, your local government may have a similar process (e.g. in NYC
>>> the city has a similar
>>> > process that tends to get very high priority tech attention as city
>>> council members will rake
>>> > providers over the coals on individual complaints come
>>> contract-renewal time).
>>> >
>>> > Matt
>>> >
>>> > On 7/14/23 8:01 AM, Neil Hanlon wrote:
>>> >> Hi all - I apoligize for the not-necessarily-on-topic post, but I've
>>> been struggling with this issue
>>> >> for the past two
>>> >> weeks and am about out of ideas and options other than ask here.
>>> >>
>>> >> The short version is I recently got FIOS at my (new) house, and
>>> plugged in my router (SFF PC running
>>> >> Vyos). Initially,
>>> >> all was fine, however, some time later, connectivity to the gateway
>>> given by the DHCP server is
>>> >> completely lost. If I
>>> >> force a renewal, the gateway (sometimes) comes back--sometimes not.
>>> When it doesn't work, the
>>> >> DHCPDISCOVER process has
>>> >> to start over again and I often recive a lease in a completely
>>> different subnet--which isn't really
>>> >> the problem, but
>>> >> seems to be symptomatic of whatever is happening upstream of me.
>>> >>
>>> >> The problem, from my perspective, is that the IPv4 gateway given to
>>> me in my DHCP lease goes away
>>> >> before my lease
>>> >> expires--leading to broken v4 connectivity until either 1. the system
>>> goes to renew the lease and
>>> >> fails, starting over;
>>> >> or 2. A watchdog notices and renews the lease (This is what I have
>>> attempted to implement, without
>>> >> much success).
>>> >>
>>> >> As a note, IPv6 connectivity (dhcpv6-pd, receiving a /56) is entirely
>>> unaffected when IPv4
>>> >> connectivity breaks.
>>> >>
>>> >> For the past week, I have been monitoring to various IPv4 and IPv6
>>> endpoints over ICMP and TCP, and
>>> >> have been able to
>>> >> chart the outages over that period. More or less, every two hours,
>>> shortly after a lease is renewed,
>>> >> the gateway
>>> >> disappears. I'm happy to share more details and graphs/logs with
>>> anyone who might be able to help.
>>> >>
>>> >> I have attempted to contact FIOS support several times and even had a
>>> trouble ticket opened at one
>>> >> point--though this
>>> >> has been closed as they cannot apparently find any issue with the ONT.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm at my wit's end with this issue and would really appreciate any
>>> and all help. Please contact me
>>> >> off list if you need
>>> >> additional details--I can provide ticket numbers/conversation
>>> IDs/etc, as well as graphs/logs/etc.
>>> >>
>>> >> Best,
>>> >> Neil Hanlon
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20230715/ee1c6338/attachment.html>