[Starlink] Info on IP country ranges
Alexandre Petrescu
alexandre.petrescu at gmail.com
Fri Dec 8 03:30:50 EST 2023
Le 08/12/2023 à 06:57, Freddie Cash a écrit :
> Dishy gets a /64
IF Dishy gets a /64 from the starlink operator then I am afraid one cant
make subnets in home, because each other subnet needs a distinct /64.
> and I've tested DHCPv6 on both my Firewalla and my USG. They do prefix
> delegation to distribute that as a /56 locally.
I am afraid it is not possible to make a /56 out of a /64 (the inverse
is true).
Alex
>
> No NAT required for IPv6 (incoming or outgoing) connections. And there
> doesn't appear to be any restrictions on IPv6 traffic.
>
> This is with the round Dishy.
>
> Cheers,
> Freddie
>
> Typos due to smartphone keyboard.
>
> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023, 3:54 a.m. Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink
> <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
>
> Le 04/12/2023 à 19:17, J Pan via Starlink a écrit :
> > yes, starlink does respond to its customers' complaints, although
> > sometimes slowly. its ipv4 address acquisition is scattered
> around as
> > a latecomer to the isp world, and as a global local isp, it's more
> > troublesome. ip packets have to be tunneled back to its home pop
> where
> > nat and other functions happen, sometimes around the world,
> causing a
> > much higher minimum rtt fluctuation in 15-second handover
> > intervals---bad for network protocols and applications. ipv6 can do
> > better but currently follows the same route as ipv4---an
> incentive to
> > promote ipv6 ;-)
>
> Excellent incentive!
>
> It would be good to know whether the dishy router obtains a /56 or
> a /64
> prefix from the starlink ISP. That is easy to find out by just
> looking
> at the packets. This would tell whether a NAT can be avoided at
> home,
> and hence more apps made possible.
>
> IT would also be good to know whether the claimed IPv6 access on
> dishy
> is via a tunnel (IPv6 in IPv6, or IPv6 in IPv4) or it is 'native' (no
> tunnel). That will tell many things about additional latency that
> might
> be brought in by IPv6. (we'd want less latency, not more).
>
> After that, one can look more at promoting IPv6. Otherwise, IPv6
> might
> still look as a hurdle, an obstacle, additional work that is too
> little
> necessary, or might even be worse than IPv4.
>
> Alex
>
> > --
> > J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan at UVic.CA,
> Web.UVic.CA/~pan <http://Web.UVic.CA/~pan>
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 4:04 AM Noel Butler
> <noel.butler at ausics.net> wrote:
> >> Thanks, it seems they are trying it on then :)
> >>
> >> On 04/12/2023 10:44, J Pan wrote:
> >>
> >> starlink advertises its customer ip address location at
> >> http://geoip.starlinkisp.net (not always updated but good enough in
> >> most cases and traceroute can confirm to some extent as well)
> >> --
> >> J Pan, UVic CSc, ECS566, 250-472-5796 (NO VM), Pan at UVic.CA,
> Web.UVic.CA/~pan <http://Web.UVic.CA/~pan>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 4:15 PM Noel Butler via Starlink
> >> <starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I run an open access usenet server, but only for those within
> my CC, so access is by IP based on our CC allocations from APNIC.
> >>
> >> Because IPv4 exhaustion this changes sometimes with buying
> allocations from other regions, and if they get denied access I
> encourage them to let us know so we can keep ACL's updated, I've
> had a request from a starlink user who claims they are here, but
> traceroute shows them in .DE
> >>
> >> tracing some 217.foo.ad.dr
> >>
> >> ...
> >> 9 ae-6.r21.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net
> <http://ae-6.r21.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net> (129.250.3.183)
> 290.223 ms 290.180 ms ae-1.r20.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net
> <http://ae-1.r20.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net> (129.250.7.35) 280.523 ms
> >> 10 ae-1.a03.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net
> <http://ae-1.a03.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net> (129.250.3.152)
> 290.109 ms 289.667 ms 292.864 ms
> >> 11 ae-0.spacex.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net
> <http://ae-0.spacex.frnkge13.de.bb.gin.ntt.net> (213.198.72.19)
> 279.611 ms 278.840 ms 279.592 ms
> >> 12 undefined.hostname.localhost (206.224.65.189) 280.127 ms
> 278.506 ms 284.265 ms
> >> 13 undefined.hostname.localhost (206.224.65.209) 284.198 ms
> undefined.hostname.localhost (206.224.65.201) 274.663 ms 273.073 ms
> >> 14 * * *
> >>
> >>
> >> As it is our policy to not collect any user info or issue
> user/pass's and only allow access by IP, I'm hoping someone here
> knows if they are full of it, or does starlink really assign
> addresses from anywhere? That one hardly makes sense for user
> experience, or maybe starlink has so few users in this country
> they haven't bothered changing anything yet?
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Noel Butler
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Starlink mailing list
> >> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Noel Butler
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Starlink mailing list
> > Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> _______________________________________________
> Starlink mailing list
> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>
More information about the Starlink
mailing list