T-Mobile can't do IPv6 PD - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 18, 2024, 06:49:39 pm
content: As mentioned here, I got T-Mobile 5G as backup WAN for my pfSense box.Shit show in IPv6 as they provide only an /64 without PD:https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobileisp/comments/18fj79s/bleh_tmobile_assigns_a_64_prefix_on_ipv6_not_fun/?rdt=62595https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=204991just the first hits from google.My attack plan is to set up a tunnel brocker on the ipv4 TMobile WAN to get theipv6 PD/56 as my main WAN.https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/recipes/ipv6-tunnel-broker.htmlDo you think it will fly?PS: NATv6 is an insult to the IPv6 standard, do not wanna do itPS2: I have no balls and time to phone up Tmobile and complainPS3: Should I file an FCC complain? Are the ISPs not obigated to deliver a proper IPv6 with PD?

author: ddrown
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 02:29:29 pm
content: As far as I can tell, there are no mobile providers that support dhcpv6-pd, I believe they're all using rfc7278/64share for tethered/Ethernet links. This is a limitation in the PDP implementations on the mobile network side. If you have multiple networks, you can use nd proxy but the 5G gateways are really designed for one network.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 02:51:07 pm
content: Fromhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefix_delegation:QuoteI would recommend Hurricane Electric as IPv6 tunnel broker. But it can be a hit or miss on the mobile provider's side (CGNAT).

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 02:56:16 pm
content: You have IPv6 service from your ISP? What luxury.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 03:30:47 pm
content: Without IPv6 it wouldn't be internet access as there are IPv6-only services (because of the lack of IPv4 address space). Unfortunately some ISPs/hosters are still stuck in the last millenium.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 03:34:18 pm
content: Quote from: madires on October 19, 2024, 03:30:47 pmWhich services can't operate with IPv4? A huge number of people still don't have IPv6 service. A huge number of services listed in IPv6 documentation as having offered IPv6 to their customers for a decade still don't offer it in reality.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 03:41:25 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 19, 2024, 02:56:16 pmYou don't? Why are you still giving them money?

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 03:56:14 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 19, 2024, 03:34:18 pmThe ones which don't have sufficient IPv4 address space and don't want to pay a fortune to an address broker for a few IPv4 addresses.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 04:05:29 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on October 19, 2024, 03:41:25 pmI use EE for mobile. It never gives me an IPv6 address. I use TalkTalk at home, and they don't even claim to offer IPv6. We should soon have Quickline FTTH where I live. They don't support IPv6.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 04:16:49 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 19, 2024, 04:05:29 pmThere appears to be a legitimate reason not to supply IPv6 to mobile devices, if what ddrown says is true.I did catch EE blocking access to competitors websites the other day, though, so.. I'd rethink that relationship. TalkTalk you couldn't pay me to do business with, on account of them demanding I pay another customers bill, complete with disclosing private information about them to me, before releasing the line they don't own to the house I do.Brand new FTTH infrastructure, well, that's just sad. Admittedly mine was lit without IPv6 support too, but that was only while they migrated off a legacy backend from much smaller days as a WISP.It's fairly easy to not do business with those offering a poor service.E: That'll teach me to forget IPv6 is 128-bit. Never mind that bit. Good enough for a mobile device (but sadly potentially inadequate for a proper backup connection).

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 04:37:12 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on October 19, 2024, 04:16:49 pmNot in the UK. They all suck. Each just sucks a little differently. There is no culture of providing quality service.A lot of people complain about TalkTalk, but the only problems they caused me was due to Openreach's crappy infrastructure, and largely out of their control. It looks like they will be out of business soon, so I'll probably sign up for Quickline when they've finished putting fibre through the village.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 04:38:13 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 19, 2024, 04:37:12 pmI've had no significant issues with any of the business oriented ISPs I've used over the years, apart from the sharing of sad, rotting monopoly infrastructure.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 04:41:02 pm
content: Quote from: madires on October 19, 2024, 03:56:14 pmSuch as…?Tons of people have no IPv6 service, and I can’t think of anything that doesn’t work anyway.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 04:48:06 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2024, 04:41:02 pmHe might be referring to things the average person is not intended to access. When the IPv6 rollout was extremely limited some data centres already had 30% or more of their traffic as IPv6. None of it was the average user accessing public facing services.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 05:20:58 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2024, 04:41:02 pmipv6onlyhosting.com for example.Many large server platforms run IPv6-only while front-end load balancers or reverse proxies are dual stack. This is a typcial solution to minimize IPv4 address usage.Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2024, 04:41:02 pmThe reality is that we have a lack of IPv4 address space right now. Some networks are lucky and have huge allocations from the past. But newcomers have a really hard time to get IPv4. There are many methods to conserve IPv4 addresses in order to keep services running for IP4-only users. However, as more devices are connected to the internet the issue becomes more severe. Have a look at RIPE's (or ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC, AFRINIC) address statistics. BTW, IPv6 isn't anything brand new. 25 years ago we started playing with it. If some morons try to ignore IPv6 it will hit them very hard in the near future.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 05:40:53 pm
content: Quote from: madires on October 19, 2024, 05:20:58 pmBut it’s fully accessible to/from IPv4, so it isnotinaccessible from IPv4, which is the condition I stated in the part of my quote that you respond to below.Quote from: madires on October 19, 2024, 05:20:58 pmWe ran out of IPv4 addresses what, 20 years ago?Fact is, the workarounds work so well that many consumer ISPs simply don’t care. My own ISP supposedly supports IPv6 now, and the online user manual for my CPE refers to IPv6 features, but my CPE’s config pages do not show those options, and testing proves I do not have IPv6 connectivity. And since the lack of IPv6 causes zero negative impact to me as an end user, I simply haven’t seen any reason to deal with this ISP’s famously brain-dead customer service to figure out why IPv6 isn’t active on my connection.Quote from: madires on October 19, 2024, 05:20:58 pmThat’s what people have been saying for the last 20 years, and it simply hasn’t happened, and it won’t happen. The workarounds are too good. :/I wish ISPs would just bite the bullet and move forward — and it’s inexplicable to me why so many resist. But they do, and at the end of the day, the sky is not falling.

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 06:31:42 pm
content: Quote from: madires on October 19, 2024, 05:20:58 pmRight but that is exactly the sort of thing that wouldn't be accesible by ISP customers anyway. Very few public facing services and no widely used ones are ipv6 only while a large but dwindling number are still ipv4 only.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 06:37:08 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2024, 05:40:53 pmFor the IPv4 address exhaustion timeline please seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv4_address_exhaustion. The mitigation solutions are working fine for many common protocols like http, but no for all. If you have DS-Lite internet access, i.e. no real public IPv4 address (only outbound via CGNAT) you can't host any IPv4 service. Most users won't need this, but it means it's a limited internet access. If you want to run a service you'll need to do it via IPv6.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2024, 09:30:57 pm
content: My solution now for gaining IPv6 access under adverse conditions is to use a VPN service provider which supplies both IPv4 and IPv6 through their VPN tunnels.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 20, 2024, 04:12:49 am
content: Interesting discussion.IMHO:1) each phone capable of tethering should receive a /64 at least2) each 5G modem device with WAN ETH port should receive a /56 !3) each ISP providing domestic internet should deliver a /56 as least4) Soon the ipv4 will be phase out in the internet...I understand and accept the fact that ipv4 is hard to kill, but to me there are no excuse for the companies providing internet to deliver such a muppet level, ignorant and infuriating ipv6 service.Who should be the ipv6 police in this planet?PS: currently setting up the HE tunnel... will report back how it goes. I hope I am not behind a CGNAT in my T Mobile home internet

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2024, 09:16:46 am
content: I answer this one separately because it's more complex.Quote from: tooki on October 19, 2024, 05:40:53 pmNo, it's a limited accessibility via DNS64 and NAT64, another transition solution. For the transition period (from IPv4 to IPv6) we have several protocols/solutions to enable IPv4 systems to talk to IPv6 systems and vice versa. But they come with a cost, i.e. additional processing and delays, incompatibilities for anything with NAT, and more. In case of the hoster mentioned above DNS64 and NAT64 are used. That breaks any protocol with IPv4 literals, e.g. SIP (VoIP). To run a VoIP gateway at that hoster you would need a workaround, like an application-level gateway. Just one example of many. In the end we have to deploy a lot of additional boxes, adding complexity, cost and packet delays, to mitigate the lack of IPv4 addresses and the stubborness of some providers/hosts. The simple solution is to deploy IPv6 and to use transition methods only for old legacy devices which can't be replaced easily.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 21, 2024, 04:30:49 am
content: FUUU CGNAT rotten ipv4 stone ages! Like driving a Flinstone car in 2024.Thank God it is only the WAN backup connection. So with backup active, no IPV6 for me. F U T-Mobile.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 06:18:49 am
content: Quote from: coppice on October 19, 2024, 02:56:16 pmI think they see it less of a luxury and more "no more effing CG-NAT/paying for address space!".From 2020, if you're a Telstra customer (full-strength, not a decaf MVNO etc...), youonlyget an IPv6 address over cellular.They implement RFC 6887 (464XLAT) to connect IPv6-only clients to IPv4 addresses.Corporate/enterprise customers can still get proper, publicly routable IPv4 addresses over cellular.Quote from: Zucca on October 20, 2024, 04:12:49 amWhilst I agree with the push to move to IPv6, I don't think we'll see the phasing out of IPv4 in our lifetime.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 07:24:01 am
content: For what it’s worth, I also tested my mobile ISP (Salt) and the Wi-Fi at work (a public university) and neither of those give IPv6 connectivity, either. I’ll check my work computer (on Ethernet) later and edit this reply with that result.

author: Ranayna
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 07:52:20 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 22, 2024, 06:18:49 amAn internet Service without IPv4 connectivity, either directly or via CGNAT is significantly more limited than a connection without IPv6, in my experience.I have both, full Dual-Stack, but my provider occasionally has issues with their IPv4 connectivity. Or maybe it's my ageing router.Anyway, when that happens and i lose IPv4 connectivity, about half of the services and websites i regularly use do not work anymore.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 09:12:48 am
content: That's also my current observation. At the moment there are only a few IPv6-only services. But it's slowly changing as renting IPv4 (unless you got old IPv4 allocations with sufficient address space) is already expensive and more devices are getting online. There's an initiative promoting the use of reserved IPv4 address space, like class E (240.0.0.0/4), but it gets rejected because of possible incompatibilities with legacy stuff. Many keep clinging to (GC)NAT with the downside of limited internet access. A full access would allow everything in both directions. We could have this with IPv6 if everyone would deploy it.

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 09:59:48 am
content: Can you configure a different APN to obtain a /48 or something with tmobile?Typically a sim is one device, so one ipv6 address is enough.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 10:00:26 am
content: Quote from: Zucca on October 21, 2024, 04:30:49 amI had the same problem with Hurricane Electric.Since where I am now I am behind multiple NAT routers, I am using Wireguard to Cyptostorm which while it does not give me a routable IPv4 or IPv6 address, which would defeat the purpose of using a VPN service for privacy anyway, does allow port forwarding of the upper ports on IPv4 and IPv6 so I can receive incoming connections.Quote from: Halcyon on October 22, 2024, 06:18:49 amFor many years I had IPv6 through protocol 41 to SIXXS, and then AT&T U-Verse blocked protocol 41 outside their network. So then I used protocol 41 to an IPv6 gateway inside AT&T's network, but they blocked that also. Then I used protocol 41 to the default IPv6 gateway inside of AT&T's network, which was the one AT&T would have used, but then AT&T blocked protocol 41 at their customer's routers.I contacted AT&T's customer support and got all kinds of excuses including having to pay extra for IPv6, because otherwise customers could get free static IP addresses, and IPv6 being blocked because of law enforcement restrictions. At one point AT&T was trying to convince me that protocol 41 was the same as UDP port 41.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 01:10:34 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on October 22, 2024, 10:00:26 amWell I am tired to fix somebody else problems. If my backup 5G ISPs are so stupid to not provide decent IPV6, I can live without it.Thanks for letting me know about your system! Looks interesting, is Cyptostorm bandwidth/speed enough for you?

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 01:12:33 pm
content: We need a IPv6 police that kicks in the balls bad ISPs. Maybe a report to the FCC could help?PS: Good ISPs IPv6 are the first step in the migration, IMHO.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2024, 04:11:14 pm
content: Quote from: Zucca on October 22, 2024, 01:10:34 pmIt hangs in there somewhere between 50 and 100 megabits, depending on endpoint, while my local connection is 1 gigabit symmetrical albeit shared with several other families. That is plenty fast for anything I do, and I can always use multiple tunnels to different endpoints for faster speeds. The annoying thing about a VPN is that any location based advertising and mapping will identify the VPN endpoint rather than your true location unless you happen to live next to the VPN endpoint. Eventually I would like to terminate the VPN tunnels at my OPNSense router so that I can use source routing, but I have not managed to get that to work with either OpenVPN or Wireguard.I only switched to Wireguard recently when I started having problems with OpenVPN, and then I discovered that Wireguard was tunneling IPv6 whereas OpenVPN was not. In theprocess of learning Wireguard, I discovered some other VPN services which advertise the same sort of services besides Cryptostorm, like AzireVPN and Perfect Privacy VPN.Quote from: Zucca on October 22, 2024, 01:12:33 pmI did that over AT&T blocking protocol 41. AT&T responded to the FCC while not allowing me to see their response, and the FCC said that blocking protocol 41 was fine which seems odd because AT&T was blocking third party traffic and services, but that is how the FCC rolls.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 24, 2024, 06:03:00 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on October 22, 2024, 10:00:26 amWhat a load of old shit. I hate when companies try this nonsense on. IP addresses shouldn't cost money, or in the case of IPv4, cost very little.I have a static IPv4 address for my home internet connection. I paid a deposit to have it, which is entirely refundable if I switch ISPs. Otherwise, most ISPs might charge a few bucks a month for the privilege.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2024, 08:42:47 am
content: The situation over here is a bit different. For consumer internet access we get dynamic IP addresses (they tell it's because of privacy, of course). For a fixed address you would need a more expensive business internet access. Meanwhile most providers/ISPs provide IPv4 and IPv6, typically in two variants. Those with sufficient IPv4 address space provide an IPv4 address, an IPv6 /64 for the link and an IPv6 /56 for the LAN (dual stack with IPv6 PD). The other variant is DS-Lite, i.e. IPv6 (/64 for link, /56 for LAN incl. PD) and IPv4 via tunnel and CGNAT (private IPv4 address for the CPE). Mobile internet is a different story.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2024, 12:55:27 am
content: Just to close the circle, I decided to drop the IPv6 on my WAN backup T-Mobile 5G Modem.Doing a IPv6 NAT for just the backup WAN seems to me more like an insult to my EE ego than a solution.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2024, 01:13:08 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 24, 2024, 06:03:00 amAll the IT friends I know they told me in the IPAM sessions there is always large amount of cocaine on the office desks.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2024, 05:24:28 pm
content: From NANOG 92, Removing IPv4 Infrastructure Addressing from Meta’s Edge Network (https://youtu.be/IKYw7JlyAQQ?t=126):- 39% of traffic between Meta and users is IPv6- >99% of internal traffic is IPv6IPv6 usage (for Meta) per country:https://www.facebook.com/ipv6/?tab=ipv6_country

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2024, 06:22:41 pm
content: Quote from: madires on November 10, 2024, 05:24:28 pmIts interesting comparing the historic rates for IPv6 by country on that page. Some show an almost straight line steady increase. A very oddly straight line increase, as you might expect the usage to be punctuated by various services enabling IPv6 support across their customer based at certain times. Some show the more punctuated but continuing rise I would expect. Some, like the UK, seem to have more less plateaued a few years ago. One or two, like the US, have recently shown a fall in IPv6 usage. That seems weird. Have some high IPv6 using services gone out of business and pulled the figure down?

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2024, 12:33:43 am
content: Quote from: coppice on November 10, 2024, 06:22:41 pmFrontier networks is expanding their FTTH network again and is taking customers from cable providers and DSL. They don't support IPv6 at all. They have been promising they are working on it for years but so far it's not actually available.I'm not sure how big a factor that is, or if there are any other ISPs in similar situations, but that might explain the situation especially for a seevice like Facebook / Meta which are probably mostly accessed by home users.