IPv6 tunnel.... Ending. Hurry up PlusNet

[#1]

I have received this email from SixXS today: 

Dear .....(name removed)
Today is the day: it is time to call your ISP and ask for native IPv6![1]
You have been using SixXS as an IPv6 connectivity provider, and clearly
did not yet call your ISP to ask them for native IPv6. Or you did, but
they did not really get the message yet or did not provide reverse or
static addresses: Call them again for native IPv6!
Over 20 years ago RFC1883[2], the RFC that formally defined IPv6, was
published by the IETF[3]. From 1996 till 2006 the 6bone[4] existed and
functioned as a testing ground for IPv6. Per 2006, which is now a decade
ago, IPv6 has been available worldwide in production from a large variety
of ISPs.
During the last decade, IPv4 address space has also run out at most of
the RIRs and most of the large Internet properties have enabled IPv6 on
their services.
SixXS has been in existence since 2001-ish[5] and over the last 15 years we
have been providing connectivity to people around the world.
Unfortunately it seems a large number of ISPs think that our service is
a free pass for them to not deploy IPv6, as they direct their (paying)
customers who want IPv6 to our service.
With IPv6 being 20 years old now, IPv4 addresses being out, and no movement
happening, we started our "Call your ISP for IPv6 action" in December 2015[6].
We are now fully stopping accepting signups and tunnel & subnet requests.
We'll also be starting to ratelimit IPv4 speeds on the PoPs to make sure
that you notice that the freebie that is SixXS will not stay around forever.
Please really start calling your ISP, which you should have done so repeatedly
already during the time that you had IPv6 by SixXS and not from your ISP.
We hope, that by people calling their ISPs, the number one support ticket
at these ISPs will be "I want IPv6" and that these ISPs who have typically
not moved a finger yet in the last two decades to deploy or even test IPv6,
will be finally putting IPv6 on their roadmaps
Greets,
Jeroen Massar, SixXS
The (IPv)6 linked footnotes:
[1] https://www.sixxs.net/wiki/Call_Your_ISP
[2] RFC1883: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883
[3] IETF: https://www.ietf.org
[4] 6bone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6bone
[5] https://www.sixxs.net/about/history/
[6] https://www.sixxs.net/news/2015/#callyourispforipv6-1201
I felt it my duty to inform other PlusNet customers.
Personally I already have another vDSL line from a different provider that give me my own /48 prefix on IPv6, and I load balance across the 2 vDSL connections.  Both Plusnet and my other provider are in the same street cab (23), the difference is that plusnet are 5meg slower, and have no native IPv6, hence the need for a tunnel on the PlusNet line.
You are no cheaper than my other provider either, so it's not about cost.
SixXS have basically emailed me to ask to protest about the lack of IPv6 support, and I hope this forum post does exactly that
Kindest regards
landrocket

[#2]

Just had this mind-numbing web chat...
[Removed]: at 16:02:42
Good afternoon, I'm [Removed]. How can I help?
Gabriel Hopkins: at 16:03:16
The IPV6 tunnel I use from sixxs is getting shut down. When will plusnet offer native ipv6?
Gabriel Hopkins: at 16:03:33
otherwise i'm going to have to look at alternative providers
[Removed]: at 16:03:42
There are no plans to offer IPv6 in the foreseeable future.
[Removed]: at 16:04:03
Can I help with anything else?
Gabriel Hopkins: at 16:04:49
Can you raise any sort of product request to say customers want ipv6?
[Removed]: at 16:06:26
You are the first customer I have ever had request it Gabriel. IPv6 has lost a lot its urgency since
the reason why it was originally developed is no longer an immediate problem with NAT and
other similar technologies.
mav:csa

[#3]

I agree that the lack of communication from Plusnet on this issue has been abysmal. Sort it out! We haven't even had so much as a vague roadmap...
In the meantime, perhaps consider switching to Hurricane Electric for your IPv6 tunnel?

[#4]

I got this email at work today, which made me laugh.  I run a research and education network that has been fully dual-stacked across Europe for over a decade.
Plusnet, on the other hand, not so much.  Let's get on with it please.

[#5]

I have to say I had a very mundane, "couldn't really care" web chat myself about a month ago. I also updated the sixxs  Wiki with what plusnet told me. And seeing as BT now have 50% enabled on consumer grade connection and aim for 100% by year end, and sky following along suit, and with plusnet now a subsidiary of BT, all of this adds to a very shameful response/stance. The only reason I am still with plusnet is that my house is up for sale. That said I had to ring tech support the night and I got through to someone onshore, who understood my problem and sounded very helpful. I doubt I would get the same response if I moved to BT or sky.
All said, I feel very divided about who to sign up with once I move house and I am monitoring this entire board for any noise in this area.

[#6]

Is sad as plusnet seemed early on the ball with their trials but now look like they will be behind the mass market parent company in rolling it out.  It will come, but it seems plusnet dont want to be open about it until it happens.
HE are still around but I hope they dont take the same stance as SiXXS

[#7]

Quote from: gabrielhopkins

*****: at 16:06:26 You are the first customer I have ever had request it Gabriel. IPv6 has lost a lot its urgency since the reason why it was originally developed is no longer an immediate problem with NAT and other similar technologies.

Such an enlightened technical response     When will Plusnet wake up and smell the coffee?

M

[#8]

Sorry but this is likely to be a long one, so hold tight - make coffee etc;
I too had this e-mail from SixXS, and while I agree with the sentiment, I was so annoyed with their "hold you to ransom in order to get action" attitude that I canned my account on the spot and moved to another 6in4 tunnel provider.
6in4 tunnel providers and their shenanigans aside, PlusNET you really have to do *somthing*.
I get it, you solved your problem by concentrating on CG NAT, but honestly CG NAT isn't the answer and you know it, you might like to pretend that it is the golden goose, but that's only until the next service fails to work and annoys your user base into moving to another provider.
Dual stack does have its issues, I've been playing with it for long enough to realise that, equally while ISPs are getting ready for real IPv6 deployments, IPv6 enabled firewalls have been in a pretty sorry state (not using consumer gear here at the moment but previous experience hasn't been good).
You could even offer your very own 6in4 tunnel service for those of us who just don't want to wait, at least that would keep the traffic on your network, or better still you could just get on with it, you will eventually have to, like it or not, if there is a really good reason why you can't or won't move to IPv6 - you could always share that information with the community at large, you never know we might actually be able to help.

[#9]

The problem here is that broadband isp's have been approaching the problem something like this "How do we ensure our own customers are able to connect".
Instead of "What can we do to help the worldwide ipv4 crisis".
Think there is no crisis? only yesterday I was fighting with a provider over THREE ipv4 addresses, absolute insanity but that's how things are, if every broadband isp had ipv6 connectivity for all their users I wouldn't have needed to fight for those ipv4, as I could be confident ipv6 is enough.  But that isnt the case.
This is one of those situations where the .gov needs to step in and say look, rollout ipv6 dual stack within 12 months or we will fine you enough to make it financially a no brainer decision to not ignore us a second time.
IPv6 is 20 years old tech, and someone on another forum remember's doing presentations for it to a broadband isp 10 years ago, to this day that same isp still has no IPv6.
Google (and some others) have twice discussed turning off IPv4 now to block IPv4 only isps from using their services, but both occasions backed down.

[#10]

Very interesting update.
Although the IPv4 turnoff looks like it will never happen due to loss of revenue and the like, there is now discussion of a IPv4 slowdown where IPv4 will be rate limited to 1mbit/sec for 24 hours, then 48 hours the next month and so on.
Google
Microsoft
Yahoo
Facebook
Plus a load of lesser known companies.  This is planned to happen in 2016 so things are about to get interesting.

[#11]

Turning off IPv4 just isn't really viable for many service providers, there is too much software / hardware out there that is IPv4 dependent, even now many "modern" OS's are not fully IPv6 ready - Android for example, you can use SLAAC but no DHCPv6 (yeah really), so I can understand why there are many road blocks to dropping IPv4. Equally I can see why there has been an investment (both time and money) into CG NAT in order to stretch IPv4, but the reality is that IPv6 is going to have to be adopted.
Mobile carriers are ahead of the game due to the nature of the hardware they are servicing, I don't doubt that IPv6 is a challenge but at the same time when there is both a real need to get moving and a number of customers crying out for real IPv6 you kinda have to do something.

[#12]

I agree, IPv4 isn't going away any time soon.
I've been running dual stack at home for years using a Hurricane Electric tunnel and really "it just works" in al;most all cases. There are always going to be corner cases, like BT publishing AAAA records for bt.com when there wasn't a server on that address, but that's not that different really to any other website being down for whatever reason.
And at work, I've been using IPv6 myself (again with an HE tunnel) but there's been zero interested from manglement about it - and I can't see then changing since there are moves to outsource all hosting and get rid of the server room.
But the silence from Plusnet is disturbing, especially after the positive moves when they talked about it and had end user trials. If they don't come up with something before I'm out of contract then I may well be looking at another provider as well.

Quote from: Toady

I too had this e-mail from SixXS, and while I agree with the sentiment, I was so annoyed with their "hold you to ransom in order to get action" attitude that I canned my account on the spot and moved to another 6in4 tunnel provider.

I wouldn't be. You've been getting a (free ?) service from them for some time and really it is time to be pushing your ISP  over it. They are giving you advance notice, and from the sound of it have been giving notice since last year. They aren't yanking the service yet.

Quote from: gabrielhopkins

*****: at 16:06:26 You are the first customer I have ever had request it Gabriel. IPv6 has lost a lot its urgency since the reason why it was originally developed is no longer an immediate problem with NAT and other similar technologies.

That sounds about right. Too many service droids really don't have much of a clue about the technology - they aren't paid to, and I strongly suspect that few people who do have the knowledge would work for the peanuts I suspect they are paid.
But yes, it's something that really irritates me as well (a significant part of my day job is in networking), the way people think that NAT solves anything. It's fundamentally broken, and it breaks many things. The only reason many people don't see just how broken it is is because of the lengths others go to (helpers in routers, online proxies, etc) to make things work around it. A big part of why so many IoT (Internet of tatThings devices "phone home" to use a hosted service for outside access is precisely because of the problems caused by NAT - the fact that the companies selling the TatDevices also want to data mine your life is another.

[#13]

Does anyone remember this statement about IPv6 from Plusnet staff member 'P Richardson' in October 2012 !
http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,106125.msg925450.html#msg925450
[quote=Plusnet staff member 'P Richardson']I'd like to think we can do it before the UK reached 1% adoption. I can sit back and relax more this way, given it's currently 0.18%.
I'd love to say we are ready for this and it is something that is being moved on, but there are priorities, some of which are dependencies for us to do IPv6 (the reason the trial stopped was deployment of kit that was a dependency).
It's coming. A traditional Plusnet acronym for this is RSN - Real Soon Now.
Today the UK IPv6 adoption as rated by Google is 3.1%

and Google's measurement of worldwide IPv6 adoption is 10.73%

It must be due any day now ? right ?  
[quote=Plusnet staff member 'P Richardson' in October 2012 !]It's coming. A traditional Plusnet acronym for this is RSN - Real Soon Now.

[#14]

@'gabrielhopkins'

Quote from: gabrielhopkins

Just had this mind-numbing web chat... Gabriel Hopkins: at 16:04:49 Can you raise any sort of product request to say customers want ipv6? [Removed]: at 16:06:26 You are the first customer I have ever had request it Gabriel. IPv6 has lost a lot its urgency since the reason why it was originally developed is no longer an immediate problem with NAT and other similar technologies.

Your "mind-numbing" web chat reminded me of this - Youtube video : IPv6 and NATs 

[#15]

The graphic I like the best is the "Tunnels by Country" from here: https://tunnelbroker.net/usage/tunnels_by_country.php
So the UK has the largest HE tunnel count outside of the USA, a clear indication that the supply of native IPv6 does not come close to the demand. 6in4 tunnels work, sure but they are not going to be as good as the real thing.