**urgent uverse issues - needs review **

Discussions around the setup, operation, replacement, and disposal of clerk computers, not to include using MLS
aclawson
Senior Member
Posts: 712
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Commerce Twp, MI

**urgent uverse issues - needs review **

Postby aclawson » Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:53 am

For those buildings services by AT&T Uverse for broadband access:

An email is going out to customers specifying that internal 10.x.x.x addresses must be changed by July 6, 2012 or there will likely be a loss of connectivity. True to habit AT&T won't actually tell anybody what is going on but it seems likely that AT&T is converting to CGN (carrier-grade NAT) on that date with the intent of deploying an RD6 solution instead of a proper ipv6 solution.

Since all administrative computers are indeed located within 10.x.x.x space this has the potential of being a major disruption. There is, of course, always the possibility that the network engineers within the COB are aware of this and have already verified that there will be no issues, but I would much rather say the sky is falling and see nothing happen than say nothing and get squished.

Could somebody with a hotline to the right ears please make sure they are aware of this issue so they can take the appropriate actions?

lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 6139
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: US

Postby lajackson » Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:46 am

aclawson wrote:For those buildings services by AT&T Uverse for broadband access:

An email is going out to customers specifying that internal 10.x.x.x addresses must be changed by July 6, 2012 or there will likely be a loss of connectivity.

Could somebody with a hotline to the right ears please make sure they are aware of this issue so they can take the appropriate actions?


You have a hotline to the Global Service Desk. It may be worth a call to them to see if they are aware of what is going to happen. I think that would be a much more reliable way of making sure they are aware of the potential problem.

These forums are read sometimes by those who are in a position to take action, but there is no guarantee. And just at the moment of greatest alarm, the probability is that they will not be reading at that moment.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20757
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:00 am

aclawson wrote:An email is going out to customers specifying that internal 10.x.x.x addresses must be changed by July 6, 2012 or there will likely be a loss of connectivity.


I would imagine it depends on how confused the router would get if there's a 10.x.x.x network on both sides.

Anther issue is that it appears that your site will no longer have a public IP address. I'm not sure if that affects the church's ability to reach the router to manage it. It would certainly affect anyone who tries to use Dynamic DNS to access their home systems.
Have you searched the Wiki?
Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

aclawson
Senior Member
Posts: 712
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Commerce Twp, MI

Postby aclawson » Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:00 pm

GSD has been notified. I have provoked some interest in the group, they are investigating. In the meantime I have asked my FM group to check into the possibility of ditching uverse in a hurry. Unfortunately the units currently served by uverse are in no-comcast zones so that makes things more difficult.

AT&T should have deployed ipv6 like the rest of the world, but are inexplicably going out of their way to make things as difficult as possible.

There might not be an issue. SLC might be able to fix the problem if there is. But just in case, contingency plans should be developed. I know of at least one machine that does not have a modem, should the network break I'm not sure how it will work. In an emergency will MLS transit from the dirty side of the firewall?

User avatar
johnshaw
Senior Member
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Syracuse, UT

Postby johnshaw » Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:14 pm

The last time I found a renegade Broadband connected ordered and paid for by a local unit without a firewall, the MLS connection worked fine over the Internet, but that's 2+ years ago at this point

aclawson
Senior Member
Posts: 712
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Commerce Twp, MI

Postby aclawson » Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:20 pm

JohnShaw wrote:The last time I found a renegade Broadband connected ordered and paid for by a local unit without a firewall, the MLS connection worked fine over the Internet, but that's 2+ years ago at this point


My suspicion is that the only thing that would really break is landesk.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20757
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:30 pm

aclawson wrote:AT&T should have deployed ipv6 like the rest of the world, but are inexplicably going out of their way to make things as difficult as possible.


I'm not sure how difficult it would be do a IPv4 to IPv6 translation. It may have required a massive subscriber equipment replacement. Can a IPv6 location reach IPv4-only sites? If your "site" can only be reached by IPv6, how many things would that break? I'm not sure as they had a choice other then to outbid others for more IPs.

Something else to consider - is there another DSL provider for your area? They'd have to use AT&T lines, but by being on a different ISP, you'd sidestep this AT&T problem.
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

User avatar
johnshaw
Senior Member
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Syracuse, UT

Postby johnshaw » Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:00 pm

Our project for IPv6 has revealed very little love from the 'experts' for 6to4 or 4to6 The idea is to reduce and only use it when absolutely necessary.... We want NAT to be a relic of v4 due to the innumerable available v6 addresses, which will Never, ever be used.. so they say eh!

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20757
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:04 pm

But if you're on IPv6 and the majority of the Internet is IPv4 - where does that leave you?

If your internal network and devices can't do IPv6, where does that leave you?
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

User avatar
jonahhex
New Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:33 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Postby jonahhex » Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:34 pm

The sky is NOT falling.

So far the business lines that FM's provide at meetinghouses do not have NAT routing issues. The GSC has not received notification of any system changes with AT&T or any other provider claiming that that are unable to route traffic. If this was the case we will find an ISPs that can. IPv6 will not immediately replace IPv4 on these services, because many websites and networks still rely on IPv4, but will run in parallel, enabling internet users to connect via either protocol. The two protocols are not interoperable, but can communicate with one another using Network Address Translation (NAT). So if you are getting email from a legitimate contact with in the company that can be verified stating that they will not provide NAT than this is something we would need to know.

IPv6 is known of in the Connectivity department and we are ready for this change. If there are issues we do have knowledgeable engineers and a great working relationship with Cisco to resolve any problems. If this is a 10.x.x.x (ISP) to 10.x.x.x (Firewall) issue.. This also is not a problem for the church network and has been tested in our lab and in the field.

Thank you for the heads up, but all systems are greenish ATM. If you have a email or contact please provide this information and we will follow up with the ISP. One of the jobs FMs should be working on is continuously looking for bigger, better, and cheaper ISPs for their buildings.

Have a great day,
Tim Johnson
GSC - Connectivity


Return to “Clerk Computers”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest