Hi Sonos.
Its 23.04.2018.
IPv6 is everywhere, except on Sonos.
Please enable IPv6 as soon as possible.
Thanks.
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Userlevel 7
+22
What current Sonos features should the Sonos programmers remove from the current software to make room for the IPv6 software stack to be added? Or should Sonos just stop supporting any older Sonos gear that doesn't have room for the IPv6 software to be added, like they just did to the CR-100?
What advantage do you see to having IPv6 available to the Sonos gear?
What advantage do you see to having IPv6 available to the Sonos gear?
Yup, agree with Stanley_4 here. I recently went through IPv6 enablement on my local network and connection through to my ISP. Took a bit of work but I got there. But I don't have a problem with stuff still running on IPv4 locally if it needs to through NAT to the outside world.
The main benefit that I could see for IPv6 internally was that it potentially makes routing and firewall setup simpler. The reality was very different to be honest and it was hard work. I run Amigas on my local network which are never going to be IPv6 (or at least I doubt it). I suppose I can sort of see a point to it if they are the only thing left on your network that is IPv4 and the whole of the internet is IPv6 and so nothing is using IPv4 any more but isn't that a long, long way off?
Also, to my way of thinking (and probably not correct) but the whole argument that the world has run out of IPv4 is a bit of a non point really isn't it? After all, with all these people going IPv6 it should be freeing up a lot of IPv4, shouldn't it? I guess people aren't releasing their IPv4 blocks back to the wild when they go IPv6.
The main benefit that I could see for IPv6 internally was that it potentially makes routing and firewall setup simpler. The reality was very different to be honest and it was hard work. I run Amigas on my local network which are never going to be IPv6 (or at least I doubt it). I suppose I can sort of see a point to it if they are the only thing left on your network that is IPv4 and the whole of the internet is IPv6 and so nothing is using IPv4 any more but isn't that a long, long way off?
Also, to my way of thinking (and probably not correct) but the whole argument that the world has run out of IPv4 is a bit of a non point really isn't it? After all, with all these people going IPv6 it should be freeing up a lot of IPv4, shouldn't it? I guess people aren't releasing their IPv4 blocks back to the wild when they go IPv6.
Userlevel 6
+15
Not likely initially, because they'll want to maintain compatibility with IPv4 users, and because every IPv4 address is automatically an IPv6 address with the proper prefix.
I don't see a reason why they'd have to take out features to "make room". My guess is it is already in the network stack, but disabled.
I'm more curious how they are able to get into the iOS App Store since they require apps to work in an IPv6-only environment. I guess they use the excuse that the app works fine, even though the hardware is useless.
IPv6 is here to stay, people should get with the times rather than resist.
Userlevel 7
+22
I don't think that IPv6 is included by default in the Linux 2.x that Sonos is running, it is really old, so old it is no longer maintained by the Linux folks and (I believe) Sonos is having to backport anything new they want in it. You can of course check this yourself from the Sonos GPL releases page. Even if it is there in the source, if it is disabled it isn't generating code, which comes back to having to make room if it is enabled.
Sonos devices, particularly the older ones have very limited flash and RAM, you want something new, well something that is there now has to go to make room. Only other option is to stop supporting older gear which will make a lot more folks mad than the CR-100 mass disable did.
I'm guessing the Sonos techs would prioritize SMB newer than v1 over IPv6 in any case, that is actively causing users trouble today versus IPv4 which is still working just fine and will be for the foreseeable future as folks return unused and unwanted address blocks.
Of course I could be wrong and the Sonos folks could be a crew of Dogbert clones jerking us around for their evil amusement. That would suck but be kind of funny too. Hmmm, maybe they have Catbert running the support phones and forums?
Sonos devices, particularly the older ones have very limited flash and RAM, you want something new, well something that is there now has to go to make room. Only other option is to stop supporting older gear which will make a lot more folks mad than the CR-100 mass disable did.
I'm guessing the Sonos techs would prioritize SMB newer than v1 over IPv6 in any case, that is actively causing users trouble today versus IPv4 which is still working just fine and will be for the foreseeable future as folks return unused and unwanted address blocks.
Of course I could be wrong and the Sonos folks could be a crew of Dogbert clones jerking us around for their evil amusement. That would suck but be kind of funny too. Hmmm, maybe they have Catbert running the support phones and forums?
Userlevel 7
+21
IPv4 addresses aren't being "returned"... they're being bought and sold through private brokers, being sold by companies and ISPs that are implementing IPv6 and CGNAT (so they don't need as many IPv4 addresses as they used to) and bought by companies like Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and other cloud service providers that need them to provide their customers with IPv4 addresses, since they can't get them from the IP address registry services (i.e. ARIN, RIPE, APNIC, etc.). That lets companies that don't need their IPv4 blocks get a bit of return on their investment for implementing IPv6 too.
Is it a super-urgent critical issue that needs to be fixed ASAP? In a small part of the world, yes. For the majority, not at this point. But it's only going to be used more and more as time goes on. As IPv6 growth continues, IPv4 eventually becomes a second-class citizen... first on some ISP's, but over time, even in the transit networks that keep things moving. The core IPv6 protocol is 20 years old this year. Additional major RFCs for enhancements and other protocols that use IPv6 were finalized as recent as 12 years ago. Some countries have as many as 1/5 to 1/4 of their internet users able to use IPv6... some even as high as 1/3!
And since it's been almost a year and a half since my last "IPv6 around the world" post in the other IPv6 topic (Enable IPv6), I just made another of those posts. 🙂
Several ISPs in Germany are switching to DS-Lite, only offering IPv6 access, even on the LAN. Is Sonos using 2.6 kernel or even older than that?
Userlevel 7
+22
Sonos removed user access to a lot of internal information a few releases back so trying to sort out just what they are doing is far harder than it used to be. You'd have to dig into the GPL sources to see which base kernel they are using and what has been back-ported from newer kernels.
Userlevel 7
+20
DS-Lite encapsulates IPv4 traffic within IPv6, so there's generally no limitation on having IPv4-only devices on the internal LAN.
Userlevel 7
+23
IPv6 is far from "everywhere". It is certainly uncommon on home networks, which is what Sonos connects to.
Even at my work (many 100s of thousands of devices) we are not IPv6-only.
Even at my work (many 100s of thousands of devices) we are not IPv6-only.
Userlevel 7
+21
Just a few comments here... IPv6 may be far from everywhere, but there are lots of places where it is, and they're certainly frequently used. Some may not impact Sonos (like cell carrier networks; all four of the top-tier carriers in the US have had IPv6 implemented on their networks for years)... but others, like home ISPs, are significantly picking up in their IPv6 deployments. Here in the US, Comcast (the largest ISP by number of customers) has had it for a few years now, and saw over 30% of their network traffic using IPv6 within 2 years. Very quickly they started looking at plans to reduce reliance on IPv4, and make it something that operates over the IPv6 stack, rather than in conjunction with it. They haven't moved forward with those plans yet, at least to my knowledge... but there were conversations about it at least.
Yes, there are other US ISPs, like Verizon, that don't seem to have any intention of implementing it on their wireline networks... which is kind-of stunning considering their mobile network was the first of the big 4 to have IPv6 operational. But elsewhere in the world, there are ISPs and services that are only available via IPv6, or have severely limited IPv4 connectivity, since they aren't able to obtain many, if any, IPv4 addresses. I've made a few posts over time in this topic about IPv6's growth around the world.
Oh, and by the way... it's been discovered that a couple of Sonos models seem to now have IPv6 enabled in them. It's not being used to make connections to the internet (at least not yet), which likely means it's being used locally within the network (Airplay? future implementation of Google Cast?)... but it's a step in the right direction at least. 🙂
Yes, there are other US ISPs, like Verizon, that don't seem to have any intention of implementing it on their wireline networks... which is kind-of stunning considering their mobile network was the first of the big 4 to have IPv6 operational. But elsewhere in the world, there are ISPs and services that are only available via IPv6, or have severely limited IPv4 connectivity, since they aren't able to obtain many, if any, IPv4 addresses. I've made a few posts over time in this topic about IPv6's growth around the world.
Oh, and by the way... it's been discovered that a couple of Sonos models seem to now have IPv6 enabled in them. It's not being used to make connections to the internet (at least not yet), which likely means it's being used locally within the network (Airplay? future implementation of Google Cast?)... but it's a step in the right direction at least. 🙂
There's no technical argument around whether to implement support for IPv6 in a device which sends and receives packetised data today, not doing so is myopic and has been for at least a decade. The resistance comes from the fact business decisions veto all others.
For Sonos, and most other consumer device manufacturers, this is proven by the overwhelming decision to build equipment with anaemic hardware sufficient to provide enough functionality to balance their ability to print claims on boxes and invoice for as few lawyer hours as possible.
The appearance of IPv6 in newer devices is equally likely to be a coincidence from starting their development with a more modern codebase and not going to the effort of explicitly disabling it, as it is a requirement for implementing AirPlay 2.
Linux has had official IPv6 support for longer than Sonos has been a going concern. Conceding an initial conservative decision to keep complexity to a minimum, they and the entire industry has had a decade to _start_ testing.
Including IPv6 as a component of your product as early as possible allows your technical staff to become familiar with its use and terminology, helping them readily identify anomalies when troubleshooting. The later this process begins, the greater the lead you concede to competitors and the more it will cost to bring staff up to speed when it becomes increasingly urgent to do so.
Linking a request for IPv6 to the proliferation of ISP deployments will grow as those ISPs are required to castrate their IPv4 routing paths, introducing complexity and points of failure to their v4 path, promoting v6 as the preferred, more reliable path.
In the home, due to the core requirement and use of multicast in the stack, IPv6 provides a more robust implementation for use on cheap, unmanaged equipment you typically find in those environments, which the bean counters should appreciate with the reduction of support staff salaries. Another benefit is the ability to enforce security restrictions based on the scope of an address used to expose functionality.
The above is not exhaustive, but I've not seen many of these arguments raised outside of specialised communities. I appreciate much of the nuance will be lost in this lay-forum, but I also hope they help with understanding and appreciation of the subject.
For Sonos, and most other consumer device manufacturers, this is proven by the overwhelming decision to build equipment with anaemic hardware sufficient to provide enough functionality to balance their ability to print claims on boxes and invoice for as few lawyer hours as possible.
The appearance of IPv6 in newer devices is equally likely to be a coincidence from starting their development with a more modern codebase and not going to the effort of explicitly disabling it, as it is a requirement for implementing AirPlay 2.
Linux has had official IPv6 support for longer than Sonos has been a going concern. Conceding an initial conservative decision to keep complexity to a minimum, they and the entire industry has had a decade to _start_ testing.
Including IPv6 as a component of your product as early as possible allows your technical staff to become familiar with its use and terminology, helping them readily identify anomalies when troubleshooting. The later this process begins, the greater the lead you concede to competitors and the more it will cost to bring staff up to speed when it becomes increasingly urgent to do so.
Linking a request for IPv6 to the proliferation of ISP deployments will grow as those ISPs are required to castrate their IPv4 routing paths, introducing complexity and points of failure to their v4 path, promoting v6 as the preferred, more reliable path.
In the home, due to the core requirement and use of multicast in the stack, IPv6 provides a more robust implementation for use on cheap, unmanaged equipment you typically find in those environments, which the bean counters should appreciate with the reduction of support staff salaries. Another benefit is the ability to enforce security restrictions based on the scope of an address used to expose functionality.
The above is not exhaustive, but I've not seen many of these arguments raised outside of specialised communities. I appreciate much of the nuance will be lost in this lay-forum, but I also hope they help with understanding and appreciation of the subject.
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.