cancel
Showing results for 
would you rather see results for 
Did you mean: 
Need help?

When will TalkTalk support IPv6

ANSWERED
Reply
zefal
Popular Poster

Totally agree with you both. I will be raising a TAC with Cisco. Although this is related to an IPv4 issues with split-dns VPNs. If the DNS server is on another subnet and that subnet is told to go down the tunnel then internet breaks for VPN client. I just don't know why it breaks the same with IPv6 DNS server added as our tunnels are set to send IPv4 traffic only.

 

That all said...I still don't see the point in devices giving out Ipv6 addresses unless you have real IPv6 connectivity.

bazz53
First Timer

I think the question that has been asked should finally receive a conclusive response now.


Enough time has passed for an answer to be offered to customers I would say!


At the least time frame would be a start, then customers could make an informed decision as to whether to move to a different ISP that offers a service they require. Stalling or dodging the subject isn't best practice when in comes to customer retention.


I certainly didn't invest in an expensive router to ignore the long overdue requirements of IPV6, which is an ever increasing need for such equipment to perform at its best.


Seeing as you compare poorly against other ISP's, especially against the quality of your internet service (as evidenced by this thread) and the lack of any decent customer service, (again evidenced here) you'll need something soon to retain your customers that for sure.

afanen01
First Timer

TalkTalk as do many UK ISPs don't care enough about migrating to IPv6.

 

I ended up setting up an IPv6 tunnel from TunnelBroker.net (free of charge, but you need a router that can be configured to support it). You might want to go the same route.

aoxm84
Problem Solver

@afanen01 wrote:

TalkTalk as do many UK ISPs don't care enough about migrating to IPv6.


 

 But we shouldn't give up nagging them on threads like this, in my opinon. 🙂

afanen01
First Timer

The Nagging accomplishes very little except bother the relevant Community Managers or Tech Support guys. 

The execs who call the shots probably don't even know that this forum exists 😛

 

Only thing you can do is vote with your wallet, but there is currently no ISP that is price-competitive with TalkTalk that offers IPv6. Personally, I migrated away from TalkTalk for another reason, but it wasn't for broadband quality or lack of ipv6--it was because I got tired of incessant mid-contract price hikes). 

aoxm84
Problem Solver

@afanen01 wrote:

The Nagging accomplishes very little except bother the relevant Community Managers or Tech Support guys. 

The execs who call the shots probably don't even know that this forum exists 😛


 

 

Then, we can email the execs and tell them too.

 

I'm sure you can agree with me that an IPv6 tunnel comes a poor second to native IPv6 in dual-stack. We need to keep demanding it.

zefal
Popular Poster

Yep, we can use tunnels as workarounds but native IPv6 should be support by all ISPs. Lets keep nagging! An ISP should at least have some idea what timescale they are aiming for IPv6... the requirement for it, whilst can be ignored for now to some extent...isn't going away.

 

It's not just ISPs not knowing what they are doing with IPv6 though, even software developers are terrible.... I've just got microsoft to accept (in a support ticket) they don't conform to RFC6555 (to aid IPv6 rollout) for their applications like IE and Outlook.

bazz53
First Timer

alll the big isp's have long started testing ipv6, 

 

with the greatest respect,  customers are the ones who decide what they want, otherwise they vote with their feet.  by just accepting whatever rubbush we r told you become a paying doormat!,

 

I certainly am not going to acccept a pretend service workaround,  thats not what we pay for.

 

talk talk isnt that competitive anymore, im just so glad i didnt roll over and except their sneaky way of trying to extend my contract when i made a mior adjustment to my service, i stood up for my consumer rights,  i fought them, again,and again and won, the contract was ripped up and im free to levave when i want, youll find they listen yo you then!

 

consumers should know their rights and use them, we r in charge, we pay the wages,

 

Im really shocked you said that 🙂  consumer power works every time 🙂

 

 

speculatrix
Team Player

 

searched for talktalk ipv6, found this discussion. found useful information 🙂 and a fair bit of misinformation too 😞

 

Surely now that even Zen, a long-time IPv6 hold-out, offer it, and BT also rolling it out too, then TalkTalk must be able to offer it?

speculatrix
Team Player

Am now a TalkTalk customer, as they had a special deal on a phone line install and free broadband for just the price of line rental. Received a Huawei HG633 which seems fine for the 16Mb/s speed we're getting, and it does IPv6, has three modes SLAAC, DHCP and static. 

Out of hope I tried SLAAC and DHCP, nothing.

 

Given that Sky have IPv6, as do Zen, A&A, Fido, and even BT, then surely TT are not far behind???

stoatgobbler
Super Duper Contributor

 

I'm pretty sure that they'll only do it when Ofcom finally rules that selling "Internet" without IPv6 is not "full access"

 

They've been "looking at it" for a couple of years.

 

"OK, now you need to reboot your computer. .... Um, sir, please stop kicking it."
www.deadtroll.com/index2.html?/video/helldeskcable.html~content
LumKitty
Conversation Starter
The yanks ran out of IPv4 addresses last week, so now we really can't afford to be delaying this much longer.
speculatrix
Team Player

TT might attempt "carrier grade" nat, which is pretty hateful, but hopefully the bean counters will realise that IPv6 works sufficiently well so as to be cheaper to roll out IPv6 than CGN.

LumKitty
Conversation Starter
If they do carrier grade NAT I'm going to have to look for another ISP as I work from home and sometimes have to use Cisco AnyConnect VPN.
bestmanx3
Philosopher

@speculatrix wrote:

Am now a TalkTalk customer, as they had a special deal on a phone line install and free broadband for just the price of line rental. Received a Huawei HG633 which seems fine for the 16Mb/s speed we're getting, and it does IPv6, has three modes SLAAC, DHCP and static. 

Out of hope I tried SLAAC and DHCP, nothing.

 

Given that Sky have IPv6, as do Zen, A&A, Fido, and even BT, then surely TT are not far behind???


Some of those are still in trials and are not available to Joe public just yet and BT say that they won't be available to all until the end of 2016 http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2015/09/uk-isp-bt-to-deploy-ipv6-to-entire-network-by-december-...


Community Terms of Service========“Please read"========Community Guidelines



MVC_sig_pomo_baz.png

aoxm84
Problem Solver

@speculatrix wrote:

TT might attempt "carrier grade" nat, which is pretty hateful, but hopefully the bean counters will realise that IPv6 works sufficiently well so as to be cheaper to roll out IPv6 than CGN.


 

 

IPv6 is not necessarily an alternative to CGN, because we will need dual-stack for several years yet, at least. But if a router has an IPv6 address assigned at least it will have a unique IP address, even if the IPv4 address in dual-stack is CGN'ed.

LumKitty
Conversation Starter

At lot of ISPs in the US seem to be deploying IPv6 and CGN simultaneously. This is really doing my head in, because then end users blame "the IPv6 upgrade" for why they suddenly can't connect to their work VPN or their favourite Quake 1 server or whatever.

 

There's already enough crappy tweak guides for Windows Vista and upwards that recommend disabling IPv6 for performance reasons, so I really hope this doesn't happen more often.

stoatgobbler
Super Duper Contributor

Carrier Grade NAT as you say is hateful. It breaks so many things that any ISP who puts it in is likely to find themselves swamped in complaints (and hence attract Ofcom attention).

 

The only thing which works ok through it is web browsing [*](it will even break SSH sessions due to most implementations not liking long-lived TCP streams) so it's arguable that being behind CGN is on par with a "walled garden", not Internet access. 

 

Additionally, Telco-scale CGN equipment is blisteringly expensive - far more expensive than simply biting the bullet and getting IPv6 rolled out.

 

It's worth noting that PlusNet (AKA BT Yorkshire) trialled CGN a couple of years ago and then very quietly shelved it.

 

 

 

[*] Web sesstions using session cookies are likely to break periodically as apparent IPs dance around.

"OK, now you need to reboot your computer. .... Um, sir, please stop kicking it."
www.deadtroll.com/index2.html?/video/helldeskcable.html~content
aoxm84
Problem Solver

@LumKitty wrote:

At lot of ISPs in the US seem to be deploying IPv6 and CGN simultaneously. This is really doing my head in, because then end users blame "the IPv6 upgrade" for why they suddenly can't connect to their work VPN or their favourite Quake 1 server or whatever.


 

 

Well if the ISP has run out of IPv4 addresses then dual-stacking IPv6 with IPv4 CGN is their only option. If the server which the customer wishes to access doesn't support IPv6 then that's the server's fault, not their ISP's fault.

LumKitty
Conversation Starter
Perhaps, but I was talking about an issue of perception, not a technical issue. Also an issue that could have been avoided if the entire industry hadn't been dragging its heels all these years!