> On Aug 31, 2021, at 17:51 , Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 8/31/21 5:13 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
>> On 8/31/21 16:32, Jeroen Massar via NANOG wrote:
>>
>>> Fun part being that it is hard to get a Dumb TV... though that is primarily
>>> simply because of all the tracking non-sense in them that makes them
>>> 'cheaper'... (still wonder how well that tracking stuff complies with GDPR,
>>> I am thinking it does not ... Schrems anyone? :) )
>>
>> Just get a "smart" TV, don't connect it to the Internet, and use its HDMI
>> ports for your cable box, Apple TV, etc. and/or antenna input for local
>> off-air reception.
>>
>
> Yeah, until TV manufacturers actually start incorporating, oh say, Google tv
> (which is just a form of Android) they are always going to be inferior.
> Having the TV just be a monitor is a feature, not a bug. It's a lot cheaper
> to upgrade a $50 hdmi based dongle than the whole TV, doubly so since
> manufacturers have a bad reputation for not supporting upgrades beyond the
> sell date. I have no idea whether any of the external ones support v6 though.
Apple TV supports IPv6, but does not allow the user to set a static IPv6
address and it uses rotating privacy addresses, so the security implications
are “interesting”. OTOH, it does appear to support DHCPv6 and if you set M+O,
it looks like you can collect the DUID and give it a fixed DHCP address.
Android and by extension Google’s HDMI dongles/devices have some IPv6 support,
but of course don’t work with DHCPv6 because of Lorenzo’s religious problems.
> One thing that might be nice is for routers to internally number using v6 in
> preference to v4 and NAT that (if needed). Then you can easily tell what is
> still a laggard. My wifi cams might be poorly supported, but they don't need
> to interoperate with much on the Internet.
I actually have had an idea for a long time of producing a router-on-a-stick
kind of device which would be a small linux SBC with two ethernet ports and
some LEDs.
The OS would go on a micro-SD card and it would literally be a single-device
NAT64 setup so that the IPv4-only device on the downstream side could work with
the IPv6-only LAN (which might further have a NAT64 gateway to deal with the
IPv4-only legacy portions of the world outside.
Ideally, the upstream ethernet port would be PoE to power the device (and the
device would be sold with a small, cheap PoE injector in case needed).
> Mike, Google TV has been pretty nice since the Amazon feud finally ended
> though I hate that the protocol is still pretty proprietary
To the best of my knowledge, the FireTV and its ilk still can’t spell IPv6.
Owen
