Yep, because most don't even know what NAT is! On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Dennis Burgess <dmburgess@linktechs.net> wrote:
Most hotels etc, are perfectly happy doing NAT.
Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc. dennis@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – www.linktechs.net
-----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Oliver O'Boyle Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 10:20 AM To: Mel Beckman Cc: North American Network Operators' Group Subject: Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6
We manage 65+ hotels in Canada and the topic of IPv6 for guest internet connectivity has never been brought up, except by me. It's not a discussion our vendors or the hotel brands have opened either.
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org> wrote:
I working on a large airport WiFi deployment right now. IPv6 is "allowed for in the future" but not configured in the short term. With less than 10,000 ephemeral users, we don't expect users to demand IPv6 until most mobile devices and apps come ready to use IPv6 by default.
-mel beckman
On Jul 9, 2015, at 7:53 AM, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
It’s my understanding that many captive portals have trouble with IPv6 traffic and this is a blocker for places.
I’m wondering what people who deploy captive portals are doing with these things?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-dhc-capport
seems to be trying to document the method to signal to clients how to authenticate. I was having horrible luck with Boingo yesterday at RDU airport with their captive portal and deauthenticating me so just went to cellular data, so wondering if IPv4 doesn’t work well what works for IPv6.
Thanks,
- Jared
-- :o@>
-- :o@>