Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

yeah, 500/50 would kick ass big time

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

I mean from what the report is saying, Virgin is in no rush to roll out 3.1 just yet. I wouldn't expect to see it deployed as anything other than a trial this year.

I wouldn't be too surprised if they upgraded the 350mbit tier to 500mbit this year though.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Can the Puma 6 handle 500mbit/s without introducing more latency spikes?

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

I was under the impression that the latency spikes were caused by the number of channels rather than the amount being downloaded.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

I'm fortunate enough to have both IPv4 and IPv6 and my Windows kit has both addresses listed in ipconfig as does my XBox.
The only difference I noticed is my XBox NAT is now Moderate, whereas before IPv6 it was Strict.
So, do I notice any "real" difference in my day to day experience? Nope. It's been very underwhelming.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Before UPnP was a thing, it would have been a huge difference - no more port forwarding! However UPnP largely solved that issue and most software/routers/equipment autoconfigure forwarding ports. Those that don't tend to be older and wouldn't support IPv6 anyway.

However, there are some issues this solves - for example, if you've got two Xboxes, on a shared IPv4 over NAT there was no way for you both to be able to host games at the same time, as the games would go through the same port which would only get forwarded to one router. This might not have been a common issue, but it's certainly something I encountered when living with 4 other people who all had Xbox 360's.

Now, in future there's simply not going to be enough IPv4 addresses to go around and they'll be shared - this would mean that if you wanted to host an Xbox game, you'd have to hope that whoever else is sharing your address (Which could be hundreds of people) wasn't trying to do the same at the same time. Nightmare. IPv6 now means that won't happen in future.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

you are not using ipv6 though. All the OS is doing is converting your assigned ipv4 address into the equivalent hexadecimal ipv6 address so the address field is populated. As an example, if I said your forum member number is 1234 but because there are so many users we are now going to use an 8 digit system your new member would be 00001234.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Hmm, I think I do get IPv6. I can go to v6 only websites for example.?
Either way it’s not as game changer for an old codger like myself :)

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Definitely not a game changer for end users, but you can test if you've got it here: http://ipv6-test.com/

There are very few IPv6 only sites these days, thanks to the fact that multiple sites can be hosted on a single IP address.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Most users are totally unaware that there are over 65,000 ports at each IP# any one of which can serve web pages.

By default on most browsers port 80 carries http and port 443 caries https

IP:port#

This where a lot of the "dark web" lurks. ;)

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Hmm.

It's not just that you can have sites hosted on multiple ports, but you can use SNI and reverse proxies to again serve multiple sites from the same IP (And port).

As for the "dark web", that's...different.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Dark web generally refers to sites available only via TOR or I2P, or other anonymous network, and not sites hosted on alternate ports.

Very few sites host themselves on alternate ports, it's not really a sensible idea for a website you want any traffic to for various reasons. Instead, as mentioned, server name indication and reverse proxies are used. This is how I host multiple sites on port 443 at home for example.

Re: IP ver 6 testing?
 

Well it looks like they are routing ALL their IPv6 traffic over Liberty Global, it doesn't look like they are peering directly with anyone for IPv6.

My source for this information:
https://bgp.he.net/AS5089#_peers6