Subj : ipv6 resolvability
To : Michiel van der Vlist
From : David Gonzalez
Date : Sun Nov 17 2024 10:55 pm
Hello Michiel!
17 Nov 24 22:25, you wrote to me:
MV> Hello David,
MV> On Sunday November 17 2024 14:23, you wrote to me:
DG>> Hallo again Michael, yes, I'm coming back to fido after 30 years
DG>> and indeed my provider assigned me a half-ass /64, which they
DG>> consider is more than enough for a home user, so I had to decide
DG>> what I wanetd to have IPv6 connectivity for my home lab or my
DG>> house, so the LAB won.
MV> Just a /64 is very scroogy. Best Opeating Practice has it that
MV> customers should at least get a /56. many give a /48.
Scroogy?, huh.... oh God, don't get me started on this a-holes, provides *guess* billions of IPs on the same network block are better than good around here, /48 would be --according to the-- for enterprise customers so I will try to have them assign a /48 because I also tried getting my *roaming* IPv6 /48 from LACNIC, my RIR but USD$1,200/yr for hobby is kinda dealbreaker
MV> Are you sure you can't get more than just a /64? If not, for me that
MV> would be a reason to take my bussines elsewhere...
Yup, trust me, been there, done that, but that unfortunately is the only one that you can get to do bridge mode on the CPE for IPv4, we're way behind down here in South America (except Brazil) when it comes to v6, as I said I throw hate everytime I can to those grumpy old-men with their brains stuck on IPv4 and the /30 and v4 VLSM practices migrated to IPv6.
The otehr issue I do not want to rn n into is using Tunnelbroker, it's slow because of it's 6to4 tunnel nature, but it's an alternative, I do like HE, but being a VPN and its inherent drawbacks drives me away.
