Does this satisfy you? https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/#2-15-provider-assignment-unit-ipv6
While this is not about my satisfaction, yes, that is as clear and unambiguous as it should be for influencing policy:
" 2.15. Provider Assignment Unit (IPv6)
When applied to IPv6 policies, the term “provider assignment unit” shall mean the prefix of the smallest block a given ISP assigns to end sites (recommended /48)."
That clearly supports your argument that a flock of /64s is not the proper way to do this; and links back directly to an ARIN policy document, and hence is clearly relevant for North Amerika. Excellebt find, thanks.
1 Like
Another email sent off to the EFF but still no response to all the previous ones 
To: info@eff.org
Subj: My IPv6 rights are in jeopardyI would like to chat with you about a problem I'm having with AT&T's internet service. This is about consumer rights regarding their restriction of IPv6 addresses. They are not giving me a proper "delegated prefix"
According the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN), they should be offering (at minimum) a prefix length of /56 that contains 256 blocks to residential customers. They are only giving me a /64 which only contains a single address block. It is useless for subnetting on my LAN. I don't want my security cameras on the same network segment as my guest wifi. IPv6 was supposed to solve this.
I think this needs legislation. I demand my /56
Here is the standards document that says what goes wrong with prefix numbers higher than 56:
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690#4-2-3--prefixes--longer-than--56ARIN does recommend all end-sites get a larger /48, though:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/#2-15-provider-assignment-unit-ipv6Thank you for your time and consideration
And while we're on the subject of IPv6 rights regarding DHCPv6, Google's lead Android developer needs a gift of legislation, if not litigation, also
1 Like
I think with android it's a more fundamental issue. When it comes to buying a phone, you should immediately always have the option to enable root access and do whatever you want on that machine. Sure, it could be argued that a special combination of buttons during boot and a select "turn on root access, I know what I'm doing" would be good, but I don't see any reason why the seller of a piece of hardware should be able to prevent you from installing whatever the hell you want on it.
2 Likes
The frustration is getting to me. I've done all I can and yet I sit here refreshing my WAN6 asking for a /61 while all I get is a /64. Blood vessels in my eyeballs are about to burst
I can tell you that the technical problem can be gotten around by installing debian/rpi OS and using wide-dhcpv6-client but that shit shouldn't be necessary.
As far as I understand it, the residential gateway itself gets a /60 but 2 bits are reserved for the gateway itself, and you only get 2 bits = 4 subnets
OH and one of those subnets goes to your WAN connection. So yeah, you can have 3 internal subnets.
1 Like
I can't take it anymore. I just got off the phone with sonic.com. They strung my street recently within the last three weeks. Install date is the 15th. I'll give a whirl for the 30 day free trial. I asked ipv6 questions, but I didn't get any answers from the sales guy. But it doesn't look good for the 2nd question that I now have found. But I'll try it anyways to see.
My friend has sonic fiber. He says there's no native ipv6. you can hook up a 6rd tunnel I think. but the speed is reduced.
1 Like
6RD isn't all that bad, though. It won't have the netflix problem the way HE.net tunnels do with not being able to verify location.
https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/network/ipv6_ipv4_transitioning#rd_tunnel_isp-provided_ipv6_transition
Uh oh, their config instructions show a screenshot with a /64 PD. They have the same problem. Where's my /56? I verified with tech support and cancelled the install. Shame
When I finally get proper IPv6, I'm turning off DHCP on the WAN for v4 entirely and tunneling it
AT&T runs a 6RD server and you get a /60 PD. I feel like an idiot now
In /etc/config/network:
config interface 'wan6'
option proto '6rd'
option iface6rd 'wan'
option peeraddr '12.83.49.81'
option ip6prefixlen '60'
option mtu '1480'
option ip6prefix '2602:30x:xxxx:xxx0::'
option ip4prefixlen '32'
replace ip6prefix with the result of this script run from bash
root@OpenWrt:~# V4L=69.209.xx.xx
root@OpenWrt:~# echo $V4L | awk -F. '{ t=sprintf("%02x%02x%02x%02x", $1, $2, $3,
$4); print "2602:30"substr(t,1,1)":"substr(t,2,4)":"substr(t,6)"0::" }'
2602:30x:xxxx:xxx0::
root@OpenWrt:~#
Done, I got my /60
1 Like
If the government can't force Mac to write a backdoor for them, how can they force Android to write IP6 code?
Sure I did the same thing when I was first setting up. However I found that my 1Gbps became about a 20Mbps connection over IPv6. Try running a fast.com speed test over the 6rd server. Also a /60 is not a /56
1 Like
690/670 Nice.
Yeah, it's not 256, but at least my guest wifi has v6 addies now from the 16 I can get from them
1 Like
They must have upped their capacity significantly!
My fight isn't over for /56 native. They aren't sending an ip6rd dhcp option either, so it doesn't auto config. Shame on them
1 Like
well I think they are mostly using native now. maybe what happened is that when they switched to native they unburdened their 6rd servers. But if they sent 6rd option then it would probably break their native stuff... The big problem is they're deploying shitty native ipv6. We are soon to be shoveling government money into their lap for "infrastructure" getting native ipv6 with /56 by default and /48 for anyone who requests it explicitly should be a part of that boondoggle.
1 Like
I can not agree any more strongly