On 11/12/24 11:05, James Knott wrote:
On 11/12/24 10:49, Lew Wolfgang wrote:
Yes, routers advertise themselves in v6. We had one spate of problems where Windows users could accidentally set up their boxes to issue RA's to a dead interface. Sure, a rogue DHCP server could be set up on v4, but not accidentally.
How does one "accidentally" send out RAs, without also "accidentally" setting up a router? That would be even more difficult to do in Windows than Linux.
Windows users were, at the time, able to configure a network parameter that would basically set up a backdoor network that in most cases wasn't connected to anything. I don't remember the exact "feature". Net result was that IPv6 traffic was enticed to flow to this rogue router and fall into the bit bucket. It was a real pain to diagnose and find out which computer out of thousands was the cause. So it was accidental, the users didn't do this intentionally, most of the time.
No, it's using 100.64.0.0/10 when not connected to my local NATed WiFi.
Then they are just using NAT, instead of some transition mechanism such as 464XLAT. That block is allocated to carrier grade NAT.
Yes.
CIDR can't supply all needed addresses, true. It can provide something like 3,000,000,000 unique addresses net. Yet there are estimated to be 20,000.000.000 devices currently connected. Sure, some of those are IPv6, but I bet many more are IPv4 NATed. I've got about 20 devices here hiding behind one v4 address, and don't have any issues with our use cases.
As I mentioned, IPv6 is mandatory on 4G & 5G. The carriers can optionally provide IPv4, as yours does.
Maybe they had to provide v4 since only half of web sites, even now, don't answer to v6?
Incidentally, when I tether to my cell phone, I get a public IPv6 address along with NAT IPv4.
I haven't used my Pixel for tethering yet, I'll have to play around with it sometime. Regards, Lew