Thanks sifus for the advice. Puas hati bila speedtest.

https://www.lowyat.net/2024/325032/malaysia...rating-to-ipv6/

I wonder how will this affect current private / public ipv4 users?

Sorry man, I think my brain is having some problem. I still don't quite get your question.

If your question is "Is the hop count accurate if your telco don't use MPLS?"
The answer is most probably not. When your packet crosses to another AS, that AS might very well use MPLS / SRv6 in their network. This is a common deployment pattern used by a lot of service provider called "BGP-Free Core".
The implementation can be straight MPLS, Control-plane using MPLS with data-plane using SRv6, or straight SRv6, but the concept is still the same, with the same implication.

If your question is "Telco use MPLS routing, but you do not know if you are crossing a MPLS segment, which TTL is used?"
MPLS header has a TTL field. If it crosses the MPLS segment, the TTL field in the MPLS packet will be reduced. But your packet is never processed because it is the payload inside the MPLS packet.
Once the packet exit the MPLS tunnel, then processing of your packet from subsequent routing decision will reduce the TTL from your packet. Of course this also applies when the packet leave your device because MPLS tunnel don't exist in your home network.


Hello there, great to see you chime in. What you said is correct. Layer 3 packet don't carry routing information. You are also correct about routing being asymmetric on the Internet so whatever information gather from Layer 3 then becomes irrelevant..

This is actually what a lot of country want but don't have the stamina to push through.
The hidden issue with IPv4 right now is all the American dinosaur company are holding the world ransom.
During the early days, they were given a lot of IPv4 addresses. When IPv4 address starts to run out, they do what all capitalist do, by renting out those addresses and try to delay IPv6 adoption.
This is exactly what MCMC means by "does not have full authority over IP addresses which are an important asset of the country"

oh dang, 115.xx was actually fine for me bro

where you at though cause I'm in pj

as in for most 60.xx used to be a cursed range, but was always good to me and those I know nearby 🫠

I'm in Semenyih, slow loading at certain website this morning, speedtest web also long loading

what if the behaviour is like this --> https://www.stigviewer.com/stig/cisco_ios_x...inding/V-216790

what is the different between swu3.0 vs 4.0, looks like same only

Hi guys , I'm using the Black FX3060V

My main unit isn't as mesh controller


Secondary I set as Mesh Agent
But the mesh agent can mesh the wifi but the LAN ports not functional. Can't get IP from it

Anything I can do to fix this?
I don't use IPTV, so I wanna use all LAN ports on both the FX3060V

years only
swu3 = 2023
swu4 = 2024
swu5 = 2025
😅

This post has been edited by tyja: Jun 21 2024, 07:20 PM

In this case, the TTL will be correct, with caveat. In fact depending on deployment it might not work.

If the ICMP message is generated, it will have to continue traveling in the tunnel. The reason is that in BGP-Free Core, there is no routing table to resolve the source address of the packet. So the packet has to reach the exit and the node will route it. What this means is that you will see high latency in your traceroute because the packet actually travel the whole tunnel and come back.

In deployment that this might not work is when you try to encapsulate anything other than IP. Eg: Ethernet. When the ICMP message reach the end of the tunnel, the node expect Ethernet packet, not ICMP, hence it will be dropped.

You need every AS in the path to enable TTL propagation.

Even if they all enable it, traceroute might still fail because they configure their core router not to generate any ICMP message combined with other control plane protection mechanism.

Let's say none of all the above is true, we still might have a situation where MPLS tunnel is encapsulated inside another MPLS tunnel. This is a common scenario called "carrier of carrier".

Say all of that is not true, then yes, your packet TTL will be accurate. However, remember there is no routing information in Layer 3 and you still have asymmetric routing.

This post has been edited by kwss: Jun 21 2024, 07:45 PM

betul ke ni rm79 utk 100mbps+ 6 bln feee+tvpack lg?blh ss nama pakej kt bill..mmg dh abis kontrak pn..bkn new user..tgk astro offer rm90 utk 100mbps(upgraded 500mbps lg cun kl unifi x nak offer yg baik lg..

This post has been edited by naWrez: Jun 21 2024, 08:39 PM

Ini you kena try tanya di Tmpoint. Tapi Rm79 untuk 100mbps free 6 bulan memang ada.

No more IP sharing...

My workplace already own /32 IPV6 since 2 years ago. Going to ditch IPV4 altogether in a year or two. Not that we run out of IPV4 (we own 4096 IPs ) but it's time to move on.

Still offer /64, fuck over any business customer, hopefully they can delegate like /56 or maybe even /48 to move over

Been 4 months like this , now only announce ? means 4 months broken ?
Even lowyat also loading very slow , should be fast since local.
how long will it take to get fix ?
Which VPN is suitable and cheap ? I mean as cheap as rm10 per month ?

Does anyone know how to configure Fiberhome SR1041Y firewall especially IPv6?

I can login to the router with username tmadmin password Adm@XXXX (last 4 digit of router mac address).

I want to allow computer behind Fiberhome SR1041Y to be accessible from the Internet by IPv6.

IPv4 is impossible here since both only obtain CGNAT IPv4 address.

For testing, I have two computer:
a. One connected to Fiberhome wifi/lan
b. Another one connected to mobile hotspot to Maxis 4G.
c. Both have IPv6 public address.
d. Both have working IPv4/IPv6 internet.


If from computer thru SR1041Y are able to access/ping/tracert computer that are on Maxis 4G hotspot by IPv6.
But if computer thru Maxis 4G hotspot are unable to access/ping/tracert computer that are on SR1041Y by IPv6.

From here, I suspect the SR1041Y firewall blocked to IPv6 request from internet (WAN) to local network (LAN) as I was able to ping/tracert its public IP shown SR1041Y homepage but not computer behind it.

Thank you.

BTW for Fiberhome SR1041Y web management login

Model Name : SR1041Y
Hardware Version : SR1041Y_R1A
Firmware Version : RP0107

Does the
username : superadmin
password : f1ber@dm!n

still working for anyone?

I tested mine seem no longer working.

meanwhile, Github is still on IPv4.