Amusingly, I have a computer which, after an encounter with a severely mis-wired building and blowing a fuse, suffered some kind of PSU damage which means it now only works when plugged in one way. The symptom is very confusing too - it hangs during boot with the POST diagnostic lights showing a CPU error. Turn the plug around, press the button again, and it boots. On 03/12/2025 02:39, Barry Shein via NANOG wrote:
Back in the day it was the unplugged dial-up modem.
The gentle method support would use is tell them that sometimes the power plug to the wall needed to be turned around to work properly.
Amazing how many customers came right back to the phone saying "Yup! that was it!" (yeah...sure.)
On December 2, 2025 at 13:53 nanog@lists.nanog.org (Shane Ronan via NANOG) wrote:
Wouldn't it make sense to then play a message for those users before they even connect to a representative to check the power to their equipment?
On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 1:41 PM Josh Luthman via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Because we would get things like "why is my IP address super long, I can't play Xbox now" or "my computer says it is IPv6 enabled, does that mean someone hacked me?"
I manage the entire thing and let me give you an example of a ticket from this morning. The customer called in and said they unplugged some things and moved stuff around the house. Since then their internet/phone (landline) has not been working. CSR asked if device was plugged in to power. It was not. Customer plugged it in.
You have to realize the people we're dealing with on this topic. We get the calls for anything internet related at all because people don't use their brain to connect the situation of unplugging the internet company's box from power and it not working. I wrote a script that takes all incoming calls and scans the customer's device to see if it has dying gasp and then posts to Slack. That post comes up for 20% of our calls - people without power or unplugging it.
On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 1:35 PM Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc> wrote:
I did. I'm looking at it from the perspective of managing tier 1 customer
support issues through the tick box of enable IPv6 and managing their subnets. Implementation for me doesn't stop once it's enabled on the router.
Not picking on you specifically here, but it's generally funny to hear "none of my users ask for V6" , then "my support will be run over with V6 setup questions". :)
On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 3:09 PM Josh Luthman <josh@imaginenetworksllc.com
wrote:
Read my entire message please. That statement was speaking to the implementation issues.
I did. I'm looking at it from the perspective of managing tier 1 customer support issues through the tick box of enable IPv6 and managing their subnets. Implementation for me doesn't stop once it's enabled on the router.
On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:48 PM Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc> wrote:
That's absolutely not true. Tier 1 support will have to deal with v6 > issues. Customers will have additional issues due to IPv6. Absolutely > more than a v4 only network (today, not speaking for the future).
Read my entire message please. That statement was speaking to the implementation issues.
I addressed (separately) the support aspects. Are there cases where v6 specifically causes customer issues? Yes. Are those cases exceedingly rare these days? Yes. While things happen, the vast majority of user facing stuff these days follows Happy Eyeballs pretty good, and Just Works when you have both 4 and 6 available.
On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:28 PM Josh Luthman via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
> >Yes there can be some things to shake out to implement it, but once > those > are done, they're done. > > That's absolutely not true. Tier 1 support will have to deal with v6 > issues. Customers will have additional issues due to IPv6. Absolutely > more than a v4 only network (today, not speaking for the future). > > >What are your end users talking to that is IPv4-only these days, > because > it’s not much pretty much all the e-mail/cloud/office/docs things are > IPv6 > these days, and yeah it’s harder to remember 2620:fe::fe than 9.9.9.9 > but > who besides a few of us still have phone numbers memorized either these > days? > > Little websites named after a forest and an auction website for old junk > (Amazon and Ebay). > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 2:23 PM Jared Mauch via NANOG < > nanog@lists.nanog.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2025, at 2:06 PM, Tom Beecher via NANOG < > nanog@lists.nanog.org> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >>> this thread has done nothing except rehash the same viewpoints > that get > > >> discussed ad nauseam for the last however many years. > > >> > > >> I'm not sure if you just don't see it or you're being funny. > > > > > > > > > It's a correct statement. > > > > > > "IPv6 doesn't work" : Google's stats show that just shy of 50% of > all > > their > > > traffic is native V6. Most of the largest CDNs will give you similar > > > answers. Yes there can be some things to shake out to implement it, > but > > > once those are done, they're done. > > > > > > "My customers don't ask for it." : Customers don't ask for IPv4. > They > > don't > > > ask for NAT/CGNAT either. But you do those things I'm sure, because > as > > you > > > said, they just want things to work. > > > > > > The answer is really money. You made a business decision not to > incur the > > > hardware/software/support costs to implement V6 for your customers. > > That's > > > fine, no shame in that. Maybe that will never be a problem for you, > > maybe > > > someday it will and it will cost you. Who knows. > > > > > > But just be honest and call it what it is, instead of half baked > > statements > > > that have been repeated for decades. > > > > > > Exactly. > > > > Talking to friends at companies that do social networking stuff pretty > > much all their traffic (over 90%) is from mobile devices, and when I > look > > at the big 3 mobile networks in the US they all do IPv6. Their MVNO’s > > might vary, but the main networks do IPv6. > > > > I find myself having to tether off their networks when I’m on IPv4 > only > > networks to access things like my hypervisors and other assets that > are > > IPv6-only because they have superior networking these days. > > > > If you are doing IPv4-only, you are only harming yourself long-term. > The > > solutions are there for all the things you think you will encounter. > For > > the most part it’s 96 more bits, no magic. > > > > Yes there are a few nuances to be aware of, like proxy-arp saves a > lot of > > people when they do kinky things in IPv4 and proxy-NDP is there, but > not in > > the same way on many platforms. One of the last big hurdles out > there was > > IPv6 support for VTEP in FRR in my mind and that gap was recently > closed. > > > > I also happen to think that Apple got it wrong when they rolled > private > > relay out, they kept the inbound tunnel protocol to outbound proxy > behavior > > on the same address family when they could have upgraded it on the > outbound > > side to IPv6 which would have closed the gap even more. > > > > What are your end users talking to that is IPv4-only these days, > because > > it’s not much pretty much all the e-mail/cloud/office/docs things are > IPv6 > > these days, and yeah it’s harder to remember 2620:fe::fe than 9.9.9.9 > but > > who besides a few of us still have phone numbers memorized either > these > > days? > > > > Do you need a ton of IPv4 space? Not really, but if you’re a cable > > company like RCN, yeah you’re not doing any upgrades, but if you are > > leaving assets on IPv4 just because you are leaving them on IPv4, > then at > > some point you are just wasting money. > > > > Send it to me and Tom so we can buy more hockey tickets. > > > > - Jared > > _______________________________________________ > > NANOG mailing list > > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/NMBYWMNZ... > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/5M7ANDNU...
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/JW5R7VO7...
NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/UUXBX5FX...