cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

Getting noticed

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

I agree that communication has been poor on this issue.

 

There have been statements that early decisions were made about the MX design that need to be rethought because of IPV6.  Besides the technical issues related directly to an IPV6 stack, there likely is the issue of a schema design change in the MX.  This would mean potential complex transition steps from old MX to IPV6 MX.  One would want to preserve any IPV4 settings on an existing production MX after such an upgrade for IPV6, and that schema change requires careful planning and execution on Meraki's part.

Kind of a big deal

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

  • 1996 - IPv6 specified (RFC 1883)
  • 2006 - Meraki founded

 

No excuse for any engineer at Meraki to be blind-sided by IPv6. 

 

Trying to explain away the reality that the engineers really screwed up just insults the audience being addressed.

 

Can we have some straight talk please from somebody at the C-level. Vague flummery or testiculation will only exacerbate an already bad situation.

 

Note for the philologists: testiculation - waving one's arms around whilst talking balls.

 

rs_T709-Testiculating[1].jpg

 

Robin St.Clair | Principal, Caithness Analytics | @uberseehandel
Getting noticed

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

A customer asked his internet provider to setup a cost-free, public IP address (as of EU-VO2015/2120 Art3 Abs1/2).

 

Answer: You'll get an IPv6 net for free, but an IPv4 address only for $$. That's already clarified with the Austrian regulatory authority (RTR).

 

Meraki: ACT!

 

The actual email follows (German):


Betreff:[XXX #NNN] Bitte um Öffentliche IP Adresse
Datum:Tue, 21 May 2019 09:16:44 +0200
Von:AAA BBB via RT <CCC@XXX.at>

Sehr geehrter DDD,

allen unseren Kunden wird ein öffentliches IPv6-Netz zugewiesen. Die
öffentliche IP-Adresse muss nicht IPv4 sein, so steht es in den BEREC
Leitlinien zur Netzneutralität und ist auch mit der RTR (Rundfunk und Telekom
Regulierung) so abgeklärt. Auf Grund der Knappheit von IPv4 Adressen könnten
viele - insbesondere noch nicht so lange am Markt befindliche - Anbieter sonst
keine Internetzugangsleistungen anbieten.

Wir weisen bei der Bestellung sowie in der Leistungsbeschreibung ausdrücklich
darauf hin, dass es sich bei den Privat-Produkten von CCC um IPv6 sowie im
IPv4 Bereich Carrier-NAT handelt und auf Wunsch eine statische öffentliche IPv4
Adresse um 2,40 Euro dazugebucht werden kann:
...Die Anbindung des Anschlusses an das Internet erfolgt über ein öffentliches
IPv6-Netz sowie über eine betreiberinterne IPv4-Adresse (Carrier-Grade-Nat –
CGN)....

Es gibt kostenfreie und kommerzielle Dienste, die einzelne Ports von IPv4 auf
IPv6 (IPv4 zu IPv6 Port Mapping) weiterleiten. Zwei Beispiele:
Freier Dienst: https://myonlineportal.net/portmapper
Kommerzieller Dienst:
http://www.feste-ip.net/dslite-ipv6-portmapper/allgemeine-informationen/

Alternativ bieten wir die statische öffentliche IPv4 Adresse um 2,40 Euromonatlich an.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen, EEE
Here to help

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

if only i had the luxury of being able to pay

EE in the UK said its simply not an option any more.

 

raising the spectre of what to do with a publicised feature (4g wan backup) not working the 4g providers all work with ipv6 only...

 

Getting noticed

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

this is a bug, not a missing feature. i think that's unclear to them.

Here to help

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

i think the line is that the feature of ipv6 wan has never been advertised, and so it is not possible for it to be filed as a bug.

 

however the lack of support results in another feature (4g failover) not working 

which maybe then is classed as a bug (grey area)?

Kind of a big deal

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX


@danielpugh wrote:

if only i had the luxury of being able to pay

EE in the UK said its simply not an option any more.

 

raising the spectre of what to do with a publicised feature (4g wan backup) not working the 4g providers all work with ipv6 only...

 


Curiously, yesterday I activated an EE LTE/4G data SIM, which was assigned an IPv4 address on activation. Whether it will always be the same IP address, I do not know, but as it is for a travelling Z3C, the cellular sub-system will be enabled/disabled frequently, so I shall soon find out. I did not have to specify IPv4.

 

It occurs to me that the person who declined your request for an IPv4 address, did not understand the implications as far as you are concerned, and that such a request should be fulfilled if at all possible. Perhaps you could move up the food chain at EE and find somebody who can make things happen.

Robin St.Clair | Principal, Caithness Analytics | @uberseehandel
Here to help

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

tried and tried with support, but despite multiple support people they werent able to help, and refunded me.

i suspect its some level of automation that gives out ipv4 automatically based on the device (we have a cisco ISR with 4g card that got an ipv4 when installed last week), but it didnt work on ours...

 

as a second level - what i ideally want (but will probably never get) is;

4g router (decent mimo aerials and upgradeable) -> lan port -> meraki (mx64) wan2

 

tried that, but although a pc works fine via ipv6, obviously the meraki didnt

Here to help

Re: WE Need IPV6 Support in MX

This post is almost two years old and still nothing has happened? I‘m working for one of Europes‘ biggest Cisco partners and thinking about upcoming SD-WAN projects, this could be a showstopper for Meraki equipment Smiley Sad

Welcome to the Meraki Community!
To start contributing, simply sign in with your Cisco account. If you don't yet have a Cisco account, you can sign up.