Verizon FIOS IPv6?

Christopher Morrow morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Fri Feb 28 02:41:44 UTC 2014


On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost at snowman.net> wrote:
> I echo the 'good luck' and ditto on the experience.
>
> There's a lot of people anxious to get IPv6 on FIOS, but there seems to
> be precious little movement over there.
>

it really is just an embarrassment :(
perhaps shame will work to motivate them instead?

> * David Hubbard (dhubbard at dino.hostasaurus.com) wrote:
>> Good luck.  We've been bitching at our sales rep for years, as we've added circuits, and haven't gotten even empty promises; just the same endless Verizon BS about "it's being tested in select markets" although no one has ever been able to prove that to be the case.  You definitely get static IP's on business connections; that's just a matter of how much you pay and how many you need.
>>
>> David
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tristan Lear [mailto:trissypissy at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 1:45 AM
>> To: nanog at nanog.org
>> Subject: Verizon FIOS IPv6?
>>
>> My strategy, should I remember it tomorrow:
>>
>> We have a business-class FIOS connection where I work and a static IP as well. At least three people who work here have FIOS at home. I've read rumors about business class customers who really work their phone sex getting native ipv6, and I also heard somethin about static ip's. So I'll try that, and also mention that "we're transitioning our employees who remote in from home to FIOS but we'd like ipv6 for ... VPN purposes, NAT traversal, etc ..." I mean, that should get them a little wet right?
>>
>> I have a bit of a hairbrained theory that the reason ISP's have stagnated on ipv6 has to do with relationship between capitalism and scarcity. Having a limited quantity of anything makes it more valuable. Why wouldn't that apply to IP's?
>>
>>



More information about the NANOG mailing list