Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
  • No labels

1 Comment

  1. Sadly, there hasn't been much progress since this page was last updated in 2014.  Rather, some regression.

    SixXS itself has sunset as of June 2017; they no longer offer tunnels.  They concluded (see their website, which is still active), that they were an excuse for the ISPs to not deploy IPv6, so they announced that they'd cease operations to put pressure on the ISPs.  (I don't see that being effective, but I've been wrong before.)

    With respect to Verizon FiOS - the 2010 press release is the last thing that's happened publicly.  I'm a FiOS customer, have been asking for IPv6 since 2008, and the result is - well, either no response, "what is it - if we don't have it, you don't need it", "Our backbone has it, but our internal systems can't handle it", "Even our backbone doesn't have it", or "we wish it were here, but we have no information"  - depending n who you talk to. (Verizon is U.S. what used to be the Bell system.  FiOS is their Fiber to the Home product.)

    I used to have direct links to the FiOS product management - but those people have moved on or retired (presumably not because of me).  The current product management is unreachable.

    Verizon is marketing FiOS in the communities where it has fiber on the poles, but has discontinued expansion into other communities.

    As best this customer can tell, if you are a FiOS customer, you're stuck with a tunnel provider.  And if you're not in a community that has it, fiber isn't likely to be available to the home in the US.  (Google also stopped its expansion.)

    Comcast has delivered on IPv6 - but of course it's cable (asymmetric).  As far as I could tell, Hurricane Electric is the only tunnel broker comparable to SixXS in the US.  They don't provide DNSSEC (for their reverse address delegations.)

    I included the comments on FTTH because it's related to IPv6 availability - although most communities are served by only one ISP, there are some where there's a choice.  But the choice shouldn't be between speed and IPv6.  I have two wires passing by my house; I can get more speed/$ from FiOS, though the other wire is scheduled to have IPv6.  I expect to stick with a tunnel to a server that's over 200 miles distant - on balance, it's a better deal. 

    The bottom line is that the ISPs haven't seen the business case for IPv6.  They're hoarding IPv4 addresses, aggressively using flavors of NAT, and generally clinging to what they know.

    It would be great to see data that contradicts this sad assessment.

    (I'm in the Northeast US - YMMV.)