[afnog] IPv6 Native Mass Market Deployment arrives in Kenya!

[Kevin Chege]

Congratulations Andrew and Liquid! This is a big step and I am hoping to
sign up soon :)

What software are you using for DHCPv6 at the moment?


Regards

Kevin 

On 13/08/2016, 2:19 PM, "afnog on behalf of Andrew Alston"
<afnog-bounces at afnog.org on behalf of Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
wrote:

>Phil, in theory yes, but we don¹t have access to that second CPE, so it¹s
>hard to know what¹s happening on it.
>
>I¹m actually in the process of authoring an RFI though to various vendors
>looking to explore other CPE options and find out what¹s out there and
>who can meet the specifications we require.  Considering the volume¹s I¹m
>looking to purchase as well, it should be interesting to see which
>vendors reply with ³We can do it² vs those who reply ³We¹ll produce
>something that can do it and fast on the basis of this RFI²
>
>My mandatory specifications in the RFI are TR-069, DHCPv6-PD,
>sub-delegation to the LAN interface, RA WITH DNS advertisements and the
>ability to also run other-config-flag, DHCPv6 with ability to announce
>only DNS (for use with RA other-config-flag).
>
>We¹ll also be asking about a couple of other optional features.
>
>The current CPE options we have work ­ but they aren¹t ideal (mainly
>because of lack of TR-069), so let¹s see what options we get!
>
>Andrew
>
>
>On 13/08/2016, 1:57 PM, "Phil Regnauld" <regnauld at nsrc.org> wrote:
>
>    Mark Tinka (mark.tinka) writes:
>    > 
>    > In both cases, I took control of the ISP's CPE. Finding ADSL
>settings
>    > for a particular network is not hard, and GPON ONU settings are
>    > hard-coded to the device delivered to your premises. But, I
>appreciate
>    > that I'm in the minority, as are you and several others. With
>consumer
>    > broadband, we have to think about the masses, the majority of whom
>    > couldn't care less how Internet arrived to their homes, as long as
>it
>    > worked.
>    
>        This is a common scenario for many private/SOHO users. DHCP PD
>        works perfectly, and lines up nicely with existing v4 practices
>        (I'll use the ISP's CPE, why manage more devices than necessary),
>        with the LAN immediately on the other side of the device (seen
>        from the ISP side).
>    
>        The other case (CPE behind CPE) works "fine" with v4 (let's ignore
>        double NAT and double port forwarding for a sec :) - but when
>doing
>        v6 -> ouch.
>    
>        Andrew's earlier comment:
>    
>    > The next biggest issue was customers who for some bizarre reason
>    > wanted to run CPE's behind the CPE's supplied (effectively doing
>    > dual-NAT on the v4), and if those don't support v6 or aren't
>configured
>    > for it, there isn't a huge amount we can do.
>    
>        ... is there a scenario where prefix delegation could be made to
>work ?
>        Can CPE 2 use the prefix handed off by CPE 1, request another
>prefix
>        amd stick that on *its* lan ?
>    
>    
>
>_______________________________________________
>afnog mailing list
>https://www.afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog