From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.onholyground.com (mail.onholyground.com [204.130.133.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E8CB3B29D for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:05:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (castleinthewoods.onholyground.com [204.130.133.5]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.onholyground.com (8.14.9/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 21GI58tH012127 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Feb 2022 12:05:09 -0600 From: Darrell Budic Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E1389280-DDAE-41F2-AC50-BF7D861380FE" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\)) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 12:05:08 -0600 In-Reply-To: Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net To: Nathan Owens References: <82154B47-D33C-4BFE-95ED-C5EEFE4220CD@onholyground.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (mail.onholyground.com [204.130.133.20]); Wed, 16 Feb 2022 12:05:09 -0600 (CST) X-Spam-Checked: This message probably not SPAM (-2.591) X-Spam-Tests: ALL_TRUSTED, BAYES_00, HTML_MESSAGE, SO_PUB_URIBL_NS_40, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 Subject: Re: [Starlink] v6 is back near Chicago, sort of X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 18:05:10 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_E1389280-DDAE-41F2-AC50-BF7D861380FE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Ah, interesting. You are correct, it=E2=80=99s flipped back behind = AS36492 and my v4 is behind Googles CGNAT again. Going to have to look = and see if I=E2=80=99m on a different ground station or something. Or = maybe just watch and see if it switches back. > On Feb 16, 2022, at 11:46 AM, Nathan Owens wrote: >=20 > If you have working IPv6, it likely means you are on the AS36492 = network. If you have no IPv6 and public IP, you are behind AS14593.=20 >=20 > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 9:45 AM Darrell Budic > wrote: > Looks like V6 got re-enabled for me around 12:30AM CST, didn=E2=80=99t = notice if it was related to a firmware upgrade or not.=20 >=20 > Not super exciting, I know, but it doesn=E2=80=99t look like DHCP-pd = is currently operating and my NetworkManger config was freaking out and = crashing because it couldn=E2=80=99t get the -pd assignments. So it = broke my starlink for the morning, and since NM took the dhclient out = with it, the whole dishy looked broken. Sigh, at least it got my = attention. >=20 > Anyway, passing it along as an item of interest, not nearly cool as = some of the recent sat discussions have been :) >=20 > -Darrell > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink = --Apple-Mail=_E1389280-DDAE-41F2-AC50-BF7D861380FE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Ah, = interesting. You are correct, it=E2=80=99s flipped back behind AS36492 = and my v4 is behind Googles CGNAT again. Going to have to look and see = if I=E2=80=99m on a different ground station or something. Or maybe just = watch and see if it switches back.

On Feb = 16, 2022, at 11:46 AM, Nathan Owens <nathan@nathan.io> = wrote:

If you have working IPv6, it likely means you are = on the AS36492 network. If you have no IPv6 and public IP, you are = behind AS14593.

On Wed, Feb = 16, 2022 at 9:45 AM Darrell Budic <budic@onholyground.com> wrote:
Looks like V6 got re-enabled for me = around 12:30AM CST, didn=E2=80=99t notice if it was related to a = firmware upgrade or not.

Not super exciting, I know, but it doesn=E2=80=99t look like DHCP-pd is = currently operating and my NetworkManger config was freaking out and = crashing because it couldn=E2=80=99t get the -pd assignments. So it = broke my starlink for the morning, and since NM took the dhclient out = with it, the whole dishy looked broken. Sigh, at least it got my = attention.

Anyway, passing it along as an item of interest, not nearly cool as some = of the recent sat discussions have been :)

  -Darrell
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink

= --Apple-Mail=_E1389280-DDAE-41F2-AC50-BF7D861380FE--