Of course, I meant, “not worry about giving customer devices IPv4.” On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 11:46 AM Crist Clark <cjc+na...@pumpky.net> wrote:
> His IPv6 was staying up. It was only his IPv4 breaking. > > Maybe it’s Verizon’s way of telling you to go IPv6-only and do NAT64/DNS64 > on your home network. (Only half-joking.) Be good for them to be able to > operate the FIOS more like the wireless and not worry about giving customer > devices IPv6. > > Out of curiosity, when the IPv4 is working, is it a globally routable > address or CGNAT? > > > On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 10:44 AM Joe Loiacono <jloia...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I dunno ... I had to turn Verizon's FiOS IPv6 off because it wasn't >> playing well with my Pulse VPN. So they are providing it now (maybe not >> supporting it ;-) >> On 7/15/2023 12:05 PM, Joe Klein wrote: >> >> As from a consumers standpoint, Verizon FIOS has published an IPv6 >> website, created a discussion forum, and stated they would soon support. >> That was 14 years ago. >> >> Joe Klein >> >> On Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 3:46 AM Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: >> >>> Matt, >>> >>> I missed where the OP indicated they've tried both a direct laptop >>> connection as well as another router. I think you may have seen my reply >>> suggesting that and thought that was the OP stating he'd done it. >>> >>> -mel >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Matt Corallo <na...@as397444.net> >>> *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2023 9:44 PM >>> *To:* Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org>; Neil Hanlon <n...@shrug.pw>; >>> nanog@nanog.org <nanog@nanog.org> >>> *Subject:* Re: Request for assistance with Verizon FIOS connection >>> >>> OP indicated they've tried both a direct laptop connection as well as >>> another router. That seems to >>> meet the requirement for having ruled out his home-made router, though >>> obviously I agree one should >>> attempt to rule out any possible errors by doing transparent packet >>> sniffing analyzing the problem >>> carefully before escalating an issue. Hopefully everyone on this list >>> knows the value of the tech on >>> the other end of the line's time :) >>> >>> Matt >>> >>> On 7/14/23 9:07 PM, Mel Beckman wrote: >>> > Getting the FCC involved seems premature, since the OP hasn't yet >>> ruled out a problem with his home >>> > made router. Not that there's anything wrong with making your own >>> router, but it seems there is a >>> > burden of proof on the end user to demonstrate the problem isn't at >>> with the CPE. Even a test as >>> > simple as connecting a laptop up for a day and running pings would >>> rule out the CPE. >>> > >>> > -mel >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces+mel=beckman....@nanog.org> on behalf of >>> Matt Corallo <na...@as397444.net> >>> > *Sent:* Friday, July 14, 2023 5:46 PM >>> > *To:* Neil Hanlon <n...@shrug.pw>; nanog@nanog.org <nanog@nanog.org> >>> > *Subject:* Re: Request for assistance with Verizon FIOS connection >>> > I've always had good luck with >>> https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us >>> > <https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us>. This tends to result in >>> > a higher-level tech getting assigned to your ticket at least at larger >>> providers. Depending on where >>> > you are, your local government may have a similar process (e.g. in NYC >>> the city has a similar >>> > process that tends to get very high priority tech attention as city >>> council members will rake >>> > providers over the coals on individual complaints come >>> contract-renewal time). >>> > >>> > Matt >>> > >>> > On 7/14/23 8:01 AM, Neil Hanlon wrote: >>> >> Hi all - I apoligize for the not-necessarily-on-topic post, but I've >>> been struggling with this issue >>> >> for the past two >>> >> weeks and am about out of ideas and options other than ask here. >>> >> >>> >> The short version is I recently got FIOS at my (new) house, and >>> plugged in my router (SFF PC running >>> >> Vyos). Initially, >>> >> all was fine, however, some time later, connectivity to the gateway >>> given by the DHCP server is >>> >> completely lost. If I >>> >> force a renewal, the gateway (sometimes) comes back--sometimes not. >>> When it doesn't work, the >>> >> DHCPDISCOVER process has >>> >> to start over again and I often recive a lease in a completely >>> different subnet--which isn't really >>> >> the problem, but >>> >> seems to be symptomatic of whatever is happening upstream of me. >>> >> >>> >> The problem, from my perspective, is that the IPv4 gateway given to >>> me in my DHCP lease goes away >>> >> before my lease >>> >> expires--leading to broken v4 connectivity until either 1. the system >>> goes to renew the lease and >>> >> fails, starting over; >>> >> or 2. A watchdog notices and renews the lease (This is what I have >>> attempted to implement, without >>> >> much success). >>> >> >>> >> As a note, IPv6 connectivity (dhcpv6-pd, receiving a /56) is entirely >>> unaffected when IPv4 >>> >> connectivity breaks. >>> >> >>> >> For the past week, I have been monitoring to various IPv4 and IPv6 >>> endpoints over ICMP and TCP, and >>> >> have been able to >>> >> chart the outages over that period. More or less, every two hours, >>> shortly after a lease is renewed, >>> >> the gateway >>> >> disappears. I'm happy to share more details and graphs/logs with >>> anyone who might be able to help. >>> >> >>> >> I have attempted to contact FIOS support several times and even had a >>> trouble ticket opened at one >>> >> point--though this >>> >> has been closed as they cannot apparently find any issue with the ONT. >>> >> >>> >> I'm at my wit's end with this issue and would really appreciate any >>> and all help. Please contact me >>> >> off list if you need >>> >> additional details--I can provide ticket numbers/conversation >>> IDs/etc, as well as graphs/logs/etc. >>> >> >>> >> Best, >>> >> Neil Hanlon >>> >>
