Some individuals in /r/starlink have started reporting being assigned globally routable ipv6 addresses. So right now it's probably being tested.
Interesting, this is more like an internet proxy than connecting devices to the internet. Hope they fix it soon. Does the TOS forbid running eg ssh or remote desktop services? Or VPNs?
Eventually the Comcasts of the world will sell off the majority of the IPv4 they hold to the AWSs of the world.
I don't see why not in an IPv6 world.
And so died what was knows as "Internet" and AOL was resurrected…
citation needed
https://www.europol.europa.eu/newsroom/news/are-you-sharing-...
It is a fairly simple design.
heh, my assumption when I hear that people who know what they're doing are involved is the opposite ;)
Thank you for the detailed report! I'm very excited for the tech, especially once the lasers are up and it doesn't rely on the base station (i.e. I can take my uplink on a road trip)
I've read multiple tutorials on IPv6 and it's so complicated that I still can't grasp how it all works in my head. For some context, I've personally written an Ethernet IPv4 network stack with DHCP from scratch. I also worked on Ethernet switch firmware, coincidentally for SpaceX...
Also getting an entire public prefix assigned instead of just a single address is amazing too. On my public servers I let my ssh service listen on a randomly generated static IPv6 address from my prefix, which is not used for anything else. On that same machine I can have dozens of other public services on their own IP each (they can even all run on the same port because they're using different addresses), and when someone then decides to scan the IP of my website for interesting ports, they won't find anything.
To be honest, if someone doesn't understand IPv6, I doubt they really understand IPv4 either. Many issues with IPv6 today come from the fact that everyone and everything is so used to V4 concepts, that most products focus on IPv4 first and then half-ass IPv6 support (if they implement it at all).
Address asignment in an IPv6 world is more complicated - you can do DHCPv6, or your can do stateless auto-config. Which should you choose and when? Many other aspects of the stack require more knowledge.
And THEN you ALSO need to understand how v4 and v6 interacts so you can provide suitable compatibility - the various different methods of tunnelling and negotiation.
In my opinion you shouldn't really bother with compatibility. Just do dual stack and maybe NAT IPv4 if necessary.
For my personal use cases IPv6 just proved to be much more versatile than IPv4. It did take some getting used to since it's approached differently, but learning it is very worth it and also helps using IPv4 better
SLAAC is only a drop in replacement in the (typical) home.
I have seen too many people that have the same excuse. The advise I gave them is to forgot all the things learnt from IPv4 and study IPv6 as a totally new IP stack.
The problem is people look at it from IPv4 view, which is a currently a mess with IPv4 exhaustion.
Most people who would know how to set up port forwarding could probably set it up. I think even some routers support it built in now.
Of course, today IPv6 only can't be considered full internet access, so providers usually need both – and given that CGNAT gets consumers 99% of what they want/are willing to pay for, providers sometimes can't be bothered to also implement IPv6.
I used to have GCNAT + IPv6 on my provider, but the v6 part of their CPE was worse than useless – no option to open ports since "port forwarding is not needed on IPv6" (nevermind the mandatory firewall that doesn't allow inbound traffic unless completely disabled).
At night it's something like 10ms.
The ISP network and node is oversaturated and they plan to do nothing about it (Cox).
So I'm actually excited if Starlink can provide 20-30ms stable latency, I have an option which is not tied to the regional operators.
Pinging 8.8.8.8 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=115
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=60
Some sort of local caching going on.
Even my ISP's next hop is 2.5ms, 8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1 are both at 4.7ms.
To Stockholm, which is only 80 or so km away if you measure straight line, is 3.5 ms away.
Iv'e always been curious as to what adds so much latency and what I did read was that its the network equipment itself mostly. The inherent latency in the fiber should be on the order of much less than 1 ms as far as I understand. 3.33 us per km, and 3,33 * 104 (more realistic distance) is only 346 microseconds.
Its weird though, using mtr its very clear that its the "long" hop that most of the latency, or at least 2.8 ms. So is the figures for speed of light in fiber wrong, or is there something else that adds up to a lot of latency in fiber connections? Is it the optical components?
Signals in fiber do not travel at c. They travel at lightspeed in glass. Light speed in a material is c/(the refractive index of the material). For commercial glass fiber, 1.5 is a reasonable estimate for it's refractive index. So the actual time for 1 km is ~5 us.
Then you’ve got the buffers - you could feed 5x100M streams on 1G carriers into a 1G uplink port and have plenty of bandwidth, but if all the packets of those 100M streams arrive in 100ms, then have no packet for the next 900ms, your outbound traffic will have to either delay your packets upto 900ms, or drop them.
Keep in mind that on something like a DOCSIS3 cable coax last mile segment can have a minimum latency of 12-16ms from just the cablemodem to the local CMTS in the neighborhood, so that's actually really good. It's not as good as fiber but it's significantly better than many other options. One has to account for the need for the antenna/modem to modulate and apply FEC on the Tx at both my CPE antenna and the spacex earth station on the other end (at least a few ms).
b. no ipv6 yet. They have people who know what they are doing for neteng so I am sure it is planned.
c. all IPs are in cgnat IP space right now. Nobody is getting a discrete dhcp-assigned public ipv4 /32 yet. You can hook up whatever router you want, anything you plug into the PoE injector that is an ordinary 1000BaseT 1500 mtu DHCP client will be given an address. The router they hand out is a very bare bones 802.11ac 2x2 MIMO thing that is based on openwrt.
restrictions, you can't move it from your designated service location. That's part of the beta TOS.
Using it, it is a real 150 Mbps down x 16.5 Mbps up. I have put non technical guest users on it doing various things and from their perspective it cannot be distinguished from the separate terrestrial connection at the same location.