V6 still not supported

Tue Apr 5 20:34:45 UTC 2022

> On Apr 4, 2022, at 05:06 , Joe Maimon <jmaimon at jmaimon.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote:
>> No, isn't only a Sony problem, becomes a problem for every ISP that has customers using Sony PSN and have CGN (NAT444), their IP blocks are black-listed when they are detected as used CGN. This blocking is "forever" (I'm not aware of anyone that has been able to convince PSN to unblock them). Then the ISP will rotate the addresses that are in the CGN (which means some work renumbering other parts of the network).
>> 
>> You do this with all your IPv4 blocks, and at some point, you don't have any "not black-listed" block. Then you need to transfer more addresses.
>> 
>> So realistically, in many cases, for residential ISPs it makes a lot of sense to analyze if you have a relevant number of customers using PSN and make your numbers about if it makes sense or not to buy CGN vs transfer IPv4 addresses vs the real long term solution, which is IPv6 even if you need to invest in replacing the customer CPEs.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Jordi
>> @jordipalet
>>  
> 
> I would expect the trend to become that ISP's refuse to accommodate 3rd party vendors shenanigans to the point where it hampers their operations or to the point where it cost them more to do so.

$ISP_1 refuses to accommodate Sony’s shenanigans…
		Three possible outcomes:

			1. $ISP_1 has competition. Customer blames $ISP_1 for network problem and customer to competitor
				that does.

			2. $ISP_1 has no competition. Customer blames $ISP_1 and keeps making expensive support calls
				to $ISP_1 making $ISP_1 wish customer would bother (nonexistent) competitor.

			3. $ISP_1 has competition. Competition also refuses to accommodate Sony’s shenanigans.
				Whichever $ISP customer is using this week continues to get support calls complaining about
				network issue. Sony continues to tell customer problem is with $ISP. $ISP continues to tell
				customer problem is with Sony. Lather, rinse, repeat.

All of this, of course, becomes an effective non-issue if both $ISP and Sony deploy IPv6 and get rid of the stupid NAT tricks.

Owen

> 
> Likely, they would sooner tell the customer that their vendor (whom they pay money) is blocking the ISP and that there must a) deal with their vendor and/or b) pay/use a dedicated static IP
> 
> Because as you point out, its impossible to support this trend after a certain point, and really, why should you?
> 
> With enough of that attitude, the trend reverses and vendors will have to start using other mechanisms, perhaps even ones where cooperation with the SP is a possibility.
> 
> Joe