Congrats to AS701

Thu Jun 16 01:07:10 UTC 2022

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 12:00 PM Justin Streiner <streinerj at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I might call Verizon and ask about v6 availability as I periodically do.
> I'll check if I see anything different on my gear later today.  I have a
> GPON business service with static IPv4 at one location and an older BPON
> business service with static IPv4 in another location.
>
>
As a short and not totally complete update to this problem... A 'long time
listener, first time caller' sort of person
noted to me off-list that:
  "Hey, once upon a time I dealt with hardware/vendor things... and we
wouldn't send 'RA type' packets (solicits/etc)
    down the customer leg UNLESS they had already sent a
RouterSolicitation... on the BNG platform."

So... I copy/pasta'd some comcast facing config and.. low and behold my
link sends me a /56 if I ask for one via PD!
for <reasons that include chris is holding it wrong> I can't personally use
the v6 (yet) here, but this is super encouraging!

Perhaps this is 'CPE configuration away' from working in a bunch more
places?

-chris

> Thank you
> jms
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:18 AM Nimrod Levy <nimrodl at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Also, it doesn't seem to be enabled on ports that have static ipv4
>>
>> but progress is progress. we'll take it.
>>
>> Nimrod
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 11:17 AM Matthew Huff <mhuff at ox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Still no IPv6 in Westchester County, NY ☹
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Great sign though, maybe NY will get it eventually
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces+mhuff=ox.com at nanog.org> * On Behalf Of *Joe
>>> Loiacono
>>> *Sent:* Monday, June 13, 2022 10:55 AM
>>> *To:* nanog at nanog.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: Congrats to AS701
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> FiOS from Maryland (anonymized):
>>>
>>> enp3s0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
>>>         inet 192.168.1.164  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast
>>> 192.168.1.255
>>>         inet6 fe80::b104:8f4d:e5b2:e13b  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
>>>         inet6 2600:4040:b27f:cb00:a9b1:5f59:xxxx:xxxx  prefixlen 64
>>> scopeid 0x0<global>
>>>         inet6 2600:4040:b27f:cb00:24a8:7b31:xxxx:xxxx  prefixlen 64
>>> scopeid 0x0<global>
>>>         inet6 2600:4040:b27f:cb00:e1b6:8b83:xxxx:xxxx  prefixlen 64
>>> scopeid 0x0<global>
>>>         ether d0:67:e5:23:ec:fe  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
>>>         RX packets 2518066  bytes 1448982813 (1.4 GB)
>>>         RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
>>>         TX packets 2157395  bytes 260073952 (260.0 MB)
>>>         TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
>>>
>>> a at b:~$ ping 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a
>>> PING 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a(2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a) 56 data bytes
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=24.0 ms
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=17.6 ms
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=20.4 ms
>>> 64 bytes from 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=23.4 ms
>>> ^C
>>> --- 2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a ping statistics ---
>>> 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms
>>> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 17.618/21.351/23.983/2.555 ms
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/12/2022 1:55 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2022 at 11:03 PM Darrel Lewis (darlewis) <
>>> darlewis at cisco.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I, for one, am having a hard time finding the proper words to express
>>> the joy that I am feeling at this momentous moment!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's quite amazing, I think... that it's taken so long to get to
>>> deployment you can actually see on the fios plant :)
>>>
>>> I'd note I can't see the below on my homestead, but I can at a
>>> relative's (where the ifconfig data is from).
>>>
>>> I also can't tell if the upstream will PD a block to the downstream...
>>> and the VZ CPE is 'not something I want to fiddle with',
>>>
>>> because everytime I have tried at my house I've just taken it out behind
>>> the woodshed with a maul... and replaced it with
>>>
>>> something I CAN configure successfully. (plus.. don't want that TR 069
>>> in my home...)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Darrel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 11, 2022, at 7:05 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Looks like FIOS customers may be getting ipv6 deployed toward them,
>>> finally:
>>>
>>> ifconfig snippet from local machine:
>>>         inet6 2600:4040:2001:2200:73d2:6bcc:1e6b:43a1  prefixlen 64
>>>  scopeid 0x0<global>
>>>         inet6 2600:4040:2001:2200:e87:bf36:b6cb:6ce1  prefixlen 64
>>>  scopeid 0x0<global>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ping attempt:
>>>
>>>   64 bytes from bh-in-f106.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4004:c09::6a):
>>> icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=8.71 ms
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 8ms from mclean, va to ashburn, va isn't wondrous, but at least it's
>>> ipv6 (and marginally faster than ipv4)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Congrats to the 701 folk for deploying more widely!
>>>
>>>   (note: I don't know exactly when this started, nor how wide it really
>>> is, but progress here is welcomed by myself at least :) )
>>>
>>> -chris
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220615/be29c037/attachment.html>