On the point of customers not getting IPv6 (last point below) please see this issue for android opened 5 (!) years ago:
Support for DHCPv6 (RFC 3315) https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/36949085 So, when a corp like Google also takes such a pathetic position, what can one say about ISPs? On Wednesday 14 June 2017 09:56 PM, Timothe Litt wrote: > On the original topic, it would be nice to have a dig option that > returned both A and AAAA with one command. > > Since it does this, I tend to use 'host' (note that host -v gives the > same response detail as dig -t A ; dig -t AAAA; and dig -t MX). > > On the other remarks, inline. > > On 14-Jun-17 21:09, Mark Andrews wrote: >> In message <20170614132510.6ff832a5@ime1.iment.local>, Paul Kosinski writes: >>> Has IPv4 faded away and I didn't notice? Unlike the well planned switch >>> to Area Codes, IPv6 is not backward compatible. >> It has started to fade away. If you have IPv6 at home, statistically, >> most of your traffic will be IPv6. There will be outlier homes but >> in general IPv6 will carry more traffic than IPv4. > Not that I've noticed here in the US. Comcast does have IPv6 to the > home (well, except for some of their > acquisitions that haven't been upgraded yet.) Pretty much no other > ISP offers it. The fiber projects - google and verizon both stopped > deployment (of fiber). I think Google's supports IPv6. Verizon does not. > > Beyond that, you can get fiber (and sometimes IPv6) if you're a large > business. When I looked for an alternative to Verizon, I was quoted > ~$50K for an "engineering feasibility study" for getting fiber to the > house, with corresponding monthly charges. Not viable for my hobbies. > > There are some fringe ISPs in a few markets that offer IPv6 over DSL > if you insist - but who wants DSL speeds (and prices) when you can > usually at least get cable, and if you're lucky fiber at a much lower > cost/bit/sec? > >> B2B traffic isn't quite as high but there too IPv6 takes a significant >> amount of traffic. >> >>> (The telcos would have gotten rather a lot of complaints if they said >>> every had to get a new telephone number, and also -- new telephones.) >> I've had to get new telephone numbers to fit in more customers over >> the years with support for the old number being removed after a >> year or so. >> >> 462910 -> 4162910 -> 94162910 > Yes, here in the US we have periodic "area code" splits that cause > renumbering, stationary and advertising changes, and general angst. > >> As for new telephones, yes this has been manditory, switching from >> rotary to DTMF. There was a period of overlap but support for >> rotary phones was turned off in the exchange. > Rotary phones are still supported here. > > But I use VoIP. Over IPv4. (And my VoIP adapters do support rotary > dialing....) > >> Most of you have thrown out several generations of computing devices >> that have supported IPv6 without even being aware you were doing >> so. IPv6 support is 20+ years old. My daughter, who has now left >> home, has lived her entire life with equipement in the house that >> has supported IPv6. The house had working IPv6 connectivity before >> she went to primary school. She graduatuted from Y12 last year. >> >> I'm still waiting for my ISP to turn on IPv6. The CPE router >> supports it. I just routed around them to get IPv6 at home. > I still can't get native IPv6 - but I have FTTH and can get 500Mb/s > IPv4 (for a price I won't pay). > So Tunnels. BTW, SixXS has retired, leaving no U.S. tunnel provider > that supports DNSSEC > for the reverse delegations. (Well, none in my price range.) > > Bottom line is that experiences vary. The US has a complex regulatory > environment - and large diverse geography. It moves with a deliberate > lack of speed. > > The other consideration for the ISPs is that it's a lot harder for > them to justify charging for static/more than 1 IPv6 address. There's > an extreme disincentive for them to cut their revenue stream. (I've > seen some plans where they're seriously proposing to issue /128s. As > you say, Luddites - capitalist Luddites. Sigh.) > > The address space exhaustion hasn't really moved the needle at the > consumer/small business level - the ISPs are quite happy to NAT - and > they hoard. > >> If you have a piece of computing equipement bought in the last 10 >> years that doesn't suppport IPv6 today it is because the manufacture >> is a ludite, not because IPv6 doesn't work. > Agree, though there is also the point of view that since customers > cant' get IPv6, shipping it in products adds cost (qualification, risk > of bugs, memory/documentation) with no perceived benefit to the vendor > or customer. I don't subscribe to that POV - but it isn't entirely > irrational. > >> Mark >> >>> On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 22:10:25 +1000 >>> Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: >>> >>>> In message <f165d73a-ef43-a28e-758a-3a509eabc...@sidn.nl>, "Marco >>>> Davids (SIDN)" writes: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Not sure if this has been proposed before, but I am wondering: >>>>> >>>>> Has ISC ever considered to change the default 'dig -t' option from >>>>> A to AAAA? >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Marco >>>> This would break too many scripts. You can do this for yourself >>>> by setting the type in $HOME/.digrc >>>> >>>> % cat ~/.digrc >>>> -t AAAA >>>> % dig isc.org >>>> ;; BADCOOKIE, retrying. >>>> >>>> ; <<>> DiG 9.12.0-pre-alpha+hotspot+add-prefetch+marka <<>> isc.org >>>> ;; global options: +cmd >>>> ;; Got answer: >>>> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 1235 >>>> ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: >>>> 1 >>>> >>>> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: >>>> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 >>>> ; COOKIE: 3ababe63d14205ae8cec9f7659412776a8b43cb46b335466 (good) >>>> ;; QUESTION SECTION: >>>> ;isc.org. IN AAAA >>>> >>>> ;; ANSWER SECTION: >>>> isc.org. 6 IN AAAA >>>> 2001:4f8:0:2::69 >>>> >>>> ;; Query time: 0 msec >>>> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) >>>> ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 14 22:09:26 AEST 2017 >>>> ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 92 >>>> >>>> % >>>>
_______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
