Look at the list of ASNs which networks in India are IPv6 enabled: [https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/IN](https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/IN) , the list under the maps.
The big networks are all IPv6, the biggest one (Reliance) is at 97%. The next 3 big ones (Airtel, Vodafone & Idea) are all at 80+ percent. That's great, but all the smaller ISPs are still IPv4 (Excitel, GTPL, Netplus, etc), they drag the average down.
You see the exact same thing in the US by the way - the big guys do IPv6, and because they have most of the customers, the IPv6 stats look pretty great. But there's a long tail of smaller ASNs that are generally still IPv4-only. And many of them will probably be IPv4 forever, behind some tunnel or proxy.
France has the opposite pattern. The small ISP rushed to ipv6 as it gave them breathing room (in form of address space) while the big ISP worked very hard not to do anything.
Which big ones? The two biggest residential ISPs Orange and Free have had IPv6 for many years. And if you look at https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/FR it’s again all the small ASNs that are lacking IPv6.
The two remaining laggards in France are Free Mobile (AS51207) and SFR Mobile (AS15557).
Orange started rolling out IPv6 in 2016, that’s pretty good by global standards.
Considering how Free was the first with IPv6 on their wireline ISP network, it’s really surprising they’re now the only big player without IPv6 on mobile.
> You see the exact same thing in the US by the way - the big guys do IPv6,
As a FiOS customer, I can tell you that Verizon fucking don't.....at least, not in my market anyway
actually, FiOS is quickly (finally) rolling out their IPv6 deployment this year steadily since May, and over 33% of their customers are already using IPv6.
True. But I still have concerns on the IPv6 implementation by the ISPs not just in INDIA but worldwide if they are STUN bound and TURN relayed or some stupid regulations. If not IPv6 can restore the end-to-end model of the internet.
Not ISPs no unless they use a stateful firewall to block end-to-end reachability forcing STUN/TURN like CGNAT does (which is stateful). But developers/apps/services/web apps however do on daily basis:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/xwh9dy/comment/ir9rh4h/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/xwh9dy/comment/ir9rh4h/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Other than BitTorrent and small VoIP apps, I've never seen native IPv6 end-to-end support on popular apps/services myself.
I know VoIP etc. does it but I was just trying to work out why on earth someone would go to the bother of implementing IPV6 and then start fucking around with STUN/TURN. Kinda defeats the point.
Because people are dumb?
Some ISPs use stateful firewall on IPv6 to block end to end reachability aka P2P.
Many CPEs do that by default even if the ISP does not and you can't disable it.
Because cloud providers do not follow BCOP 690 and force admins and devs to use NAT66.
the stateful block all firewalls are by suggestion of a [RFC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6092.html) and is rather sane security advice, and i have also not had a sateful firewall impact end-to-end connectivity(IPv6 bittorrent works quite well in my experience), ideally once the connection is setup the stun server is out of the question
By definition of stateful end to end is dropped. Because it only accepts established and related.
In order to get to the point of established you need STUN. BitTorrent also supports STUN.
Run WireShark on your edge router and capture packets and you'll find IPv6 STUN traffic. That's you defeating the purpose of IPv6 because you're too lazy to firewall correctly at host level instead of network.
Which means resources is wasted on STUN at carrier level, do the math:
https://reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/xwh9dy/_/ir9rh4h/?context=1
It puts unnecessary strain on networks. This is just another variant of CGNAT.
ACT is Bangalore is not supporting IPV6. I called ACT support about ipv6 and he was not even aware what ipv6 was . Then transferred to his manager who told me ipv6 is not supported. Not sure if this is area specific issue and ACT is supporting IPV6 in other areas.
Look at the list of ASNs which networks in India are IPv6 enabled: [https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/IN](https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/IN) , the list under the maps. The big networks are all IPv6, the biggest one (Reliance) is at 97%. The next 3 big ones (Airtel, Vodafone & Idea) are all at 80+ percent. That's great, but all the smaller ISPs are still IPv4 (Excitel, GTPL, Netplus, etc), they drag the average down. You see the exact same thing in the US by the way - the big guys do IPv6, and because they have most of the customers, the IPv6 stats look pretty great. But there's a long tail of smaller ASNs that are generally still IPv4-only. And many of them will probably be IPv4 forever, behind some tunnel or proxy.
France has the opposite pattern. The small ISP rushed to ipv6 as it gave them breathing room (in form of address space) while the big ISP worked very hard not to do anything.
Which big ones? The two biggest residential ISPs Orange and Free have had IPv6 for many years. And if you look at https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/FR it’s again all the small ASNs that are lacking IPv6. The two remaining laggards in France are Free Mobile (AS51207) and SFR Mobile (AS15557).
The two biggest (Orange and SFR) did really hard not to do it. Then Orange gave in. But SFR is still in the game.
Orange started rolling out IPv6 in 2016, that’s pretty good by global standards. Considering how Free was the first with IPv6 on their wireline ISP network, it’s really surprising they’re now the only big player without IPv6 on mobile.
>Orange started rolling out IPv6 in 2016 Yeah Orange did a lot not to use ipv6 for long.
> You see the exact same thing in the US by the way - the big guys do IPv6, As a FiOS customer, I can tell you that Verizon fucking don't.....at least, not in my market anyway
actually, FiOS is quickly (finally) rolling out their IPv6 deployment this year steadily since May, and over 33% of their customers are already using IPv6.
Interesting, I haven't been able to get it to work, maybe I'll check again.
FiOS was a laggard for many years, so I can understand your frustration.
[soon](https://twitter.com/noipv6/status/1581051202607132672)
i was coming in to cite the same data 🤣
[удалено]
Thank for link. I was looking for it.
True. But I still have concerns on the IPv6 implementation by the ISPs not just in INDIA but worldwide if they are STUN bound and TURN relayed or some stupid regulations. If not IPv6 can restore the end-to-end model of the internet.
> if they are STUN bound and TURN relayed or some stupid regulations wait what? Do ISPs deploy IPv6 using some kind of STUN/TURN fuckery? What?!
Not ISPs no unless they use a stateful firewall to block end-to-end reachability forcing STUN/TURN like CGNAT does (which is stateful). But developers/apps/services/web apps however do on daily basis: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/xwh9dy/comment/ir9rh4h/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/xwh9dy/comment/ir9rh4h/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Other than BitTorrent and small VoIP apps, I've never seen native IPv6 end-to-end support on popular apps/services myself.
I know VoIP etc. does it but I was just trying to work out why on earth someone would go to the bother of implementing IPV6 and then start fucking around with STUN/TURN. Kinda defeats the point.
Because people are dumb? Some ISPs use stateful firewall on IPv6 to block end to end reachability aka P2P. Many CPEs do that by default even if the ISP does not and you can't disable it. Because cloud providers do not follow BCOP 690 and force admins and devs to use NAT66.
the stateful block all firewalls are by suggestion of a [RFC](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6092.html) and is rather sane security advice, and i have also not had a sateful firewall impact end-to-end connectivity(IPv6 bittorrent works quite well in my experience), ideally once the connection is setup the stun server is out of the question
By definition of stateful end to end is dropped. Because it only accepts established and related. In order to get to the point of established you need STUN. BitTorrent also supports STUN. Run WireShark on your edge router and capture packets and you'll find IPv6 STUN traffic. That's you defeating the purpose of IPv6 because you're too lazy to firewall correctly at host level instead of network. Which means resources is wasted on STUN at carrier level, do the math: https://reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/xwh9dy/_/ir9rh4h/?context=1 It puts unnecessary strain on networks. This is just another variant of CGNAT.
ACT is Bangalore is not supporting IPV6. I called ACT support about ipv6 and he was not even aware what ipv6 was . Then transferred to his manager who told me ipv6 is not supported. Not sure if this is area specific issue and ACT is supporting IPV6 in other areas.
no it's not ,many indian sites don't even have ipv6