D-Link Forums
The Graveyard - Products No Longer Supported => Routers / COVR => DIR-655 => Topic started by: Geraner on May 08, 2009, 02:55:35 AM
-
Hi,
I have seen that the new DIR-825 is including IPv6 support.
In the datasheet it is written:
IPV6 READY
This router carries both the silver and gold IPv6 Ready logos, signifying that it not only supports the IPv6 protocol, but is also compatible with IPv6 equipment
from other manufacturers. It allows you to move to a 128-bit addressing system and directly connect to anybody in the world using your unique IP address. Using
a dual-stack architecture, this router can handle routing for both IPv4 and IPv6 networks at the same time, so you can be assured that your equipment is forward
and backward compatible.
What's about the DIR-655? Will there be a firmware update so that the DIR-655 also support IPv6.
Will this then work with all HW versions, or only with A3+A4?
What's the status regarding this?
-
Hi,
Any word from the D-Link team on this?
Thanks.
-
It does work currently with IPv6 tunneling. Not a lot of provides offer a native IPv6 connection, so besides a router that's IPv6 capable, you also need a IPv6 capable modem (which are also still pretty rare)
-
A cheap modem (in comparison to my router) is easy enough to replace. IPv6 isn't exactly new news and these days most isp cover it, if only partially. Given that IPv4 will, finally, be running out (http://www.ispreview.co.uk/story/2009/04/29/arin-warns-isps-ipv4-internet-addresses-to-be-depleted-by-2010.htm) the "I don't want to do/pay for anything else" argument people have been hiding behind the past few year is going out the window.
Still, it would be nice knowing the device could run IPv6 even if there are no short term plans to make it happen.
-
"IPv6 capable cable modems" are primarily docsis 3.0 modems. I don't about your country, but over here they are only starting introduction slowly (together with 30 mbit+ cable connections).... Any ADSL modem supporting transparent bridging or PPPoA-to-PPTP relaying is suitable for the "ADSLv6" (IPv6
over PPP), so that would make it easier to do.
Looking at the backend, IMHO the cable market is again more difficult to adapt to IPv6. For xDSL there will be no impact on DSLAM since they are transparant too.
There's still 2 years to go until the final IPv4 address is taken. IMHO this will first be solved with IPv6 and 6to4 tunneling and for full IPv6 enabled products you will need to buy a new router. In two years the DIR655 will long and gone be EOL.
-
In two years the DIR655 will long and gone be EOL
How do you know ? In EU, for example in Germany, D-Link has 11 years warranty on their 11N products.
The DIR-655 is still one of the most sold 11N routers. Mine was one of the first Rev A2 here and is 2 1/2 years old - still 8 1/2 to live or to be RMA'd.
I don't know much about US lifetime of this device but I think as long as it is been sold in this "high" margins, they won't let it die.
-
How do you know ? In EU, for example in Germany, D-Link has 11 years warranty on their 11N products.
The DIR-655 is still one of the most sold 11N routers. Mine was one of the first Rev A2 here and is 2 1/2 years old - still 8 1/2 to live or to be RMA'd.
I don't know much about US lifetime of this device but I think as long as it is been sold in this "high" margins, they won't let it die.
Warranty is something completely different. Providing active support and updates is linked to the products' lifecycle. By the end of the year I estimate that there will be a new model, replacing the ZDIR 655 as premium consumer model. Remaining stock of 655 will be there and will be sold, but the development will move on and perhaps provide a final firmware update.
-
IPv6 support is mandatory for us, the 655 as well as our current N line is slated for upgrade, but that could change at any second.
To my knowledge most home routers will use a NAT program that allows IPv6 on the WAN and an IPv4 Local network since the NAT is not transparent.
This would make more sense as the average user is already familiar with ipv4 addressing.
-
Off topic, but nice to know: IPv6 firewalls (PC based) are still extremely rare. Opening up IPv6 connections would leave all PC's quite open to all kinds of abuse....
-
Hence the IPv4 NAT Translation.
-
To my knowledge most home routers will use a NAT program that allows IPv6 on the WAN and an IPv4 Local network since the NAT is not transparent.
This would make more sense as the average user is already familiar with ipv4 addressing.
This sounds logic for me.
My ISP hasn't changed to IPv6 yet. I don't have xDSL or and don't other modem. I just have a LAN-Connection in the wall, where i plug-in my router. The IP-address I get then via DHCP from the WAN side. It's an optical-fiber solution the ISP installed on the house where I live. (100/10 Mbit/s internet connection)
Offtopic:
Looks like I even have more speed as I pay for. :D
(http://www.speedtest.net/result/469099955.png) (http://www.speedtest.net)
(Traffic trough the D-Link DIR-655)
-
That seems rediclously high.
Try this one.
http://Speakeasy.net/speedtest
-
I wish there was a consumer available 100/10 fibre to the premise solution in the US.
IT infrastructure is getting better every day, maybe someday soon I will be drooling at a 1000mb in house drop that is suddenly available.
-
That seems rediclously high.
Try this one.
http://Speakeasy.net/speedtest
I was testing this Site, but get only about 4-6 Mbit/s in both directions.
Checked it with this Swedish site http://www.bredbandskollen.se/
There I got:
Downlink 373,84 Mbit/s
Uplink 15,19 Mbit/s
Tested it again at Speedtest.net against different servers.
The results where:
Stockholm / Sweden 321,08 Mbit/s / 14,89 Mbit/s
Malmö / Sweden 360,55 Mbit/s / 16,15 Mbit/s
Oslo / Norway 311,82 Mbit/s / 15,20 Mbit/s
Helsinki / Finland 357,70 Mbit/s / 14,10 Mbit/s
London / England 106,17 Mbit/s / 12,81 Mbit/s
Nürnberg / Germany 17,29 Mbit/s / 10,61 Mbit/s
All other server within Europe I get about 2-6 Mbit/s downlink and uplink speed.
As soon as I'm using a test-server outside Scandinavia, the speed drops a lot.
Also the test shown in my post above is done during the day and not at the evening as now. So there where not many people online from home there home because they where at work. For this reason the result was maybe so extremely high compared to now. (476 Mbit/s against 320 Mbit/s)
-
I'd actually expect the speed to be higher in the evening because of network wasn't being used so much by businesses. At least that's how it is in many places, the local drops are not busy during the day of the overall network volume is much busier.
-
IPv6 support is mandatory for us, the 655 as well as our current N line is slated for upgrade, but that could change at any second.
To my knowledge most home routers will use a NAT program that allows IPv6 on the WAN and an IPv4 Local network since the NAT is not transparent.
This would make more sense as the average user is already familiar with ipv4 addressing.
It's been a long time and some firware releases since these words but I cannot seem to find that IPv6 support on DIR655. Are there those IPv6 plans still in the roadmap?
I'm looking forward LAN native IPv6 support and Teredo tunneling into my IPv6 tunnel broker on the WAN side.
-
i am looking for this too
-
IPv6 support is mandatory for us, the 655 as well as our current N line is slated for upgrade, but that could change at any second.
To my knowledge most home routers will use a NAT program that allows IPv6 on the WAN and an IPv4 Local network since the NAT is not transparent.
This would make more sense as the average user is already familiar with ipv4 addressing.
Has this status been clarified? My ISP is trialing ipV6 and I would like to start practical efforts to learn the functional behavior.
-
i am looking for this too,
hoping for an answer or comment from dlink
-
Even the lion share of most recent routers do not support native IPv6. I heard they were considering it, but when the 655 is EOL chances are it will not be developed.
-
Even the lion share of most recent routers do not support native IPv6. I heard they were considering it, but when the 655 is EOL chances are it will not be developed.
are you suggesting that we should throw these into the garbage when IPv6 is rolled out?
-
That depends completely on how your ISP will implement IPv6.
-
Noticed a new Manual for the 655 on the FTP site.
Opened it up and saw what you see if you click the IPV6 link.
Question is whether or not all hardware versions of the 655 will get this with a firmware upgrade.
DIR 655 IPV6 (http://i38.tinypic.com/11j68ah.jpg)
If anyone wants to verify the picture just download the new manual:
Manual (ftp://ftp.dlink.com/Gateway/dir655/Manual/dir655_ca_manual_200.zip)
-
Sweet.
Can someone from D-Link confirm that this is on the roadmap for a firmware upgrade? If so, is there a vague and unofficial time frame you'd be allowed to give?
I have to say that I appreciate the effort on D-Link's part to make this a fully featured router and provide up to date and useful technologies in the firmware. I've seen the opposite in the past with different home networking vendors.
-
Very nice!
-
Hmm that is a B1 DIR-655 and that probably contain DIR-825 motherboard. SW 2.00NA
-
Hmm that is a B1 DIR-655 and that probably contain DIR-825 motherboard. SW 2.00NA
I doubt if that really would be an issue. IPv6 is Linux kernel based, so hardware should not matter.
What 'concerns' me more is that Ipv6 will not make configuration easier (for the majority of users).
-
I have believeed that there is a lot of bugs but more I see more I doubt about it !
What I have seen so far that is most a man made trouble. (yes and some buggs also)
So IPV6 is a realy challenge for support appartment for that equipment.
I hope we get IPV6 for ALL DIR-655 HW version A1-A2-A3-A4- "B5 we alredy know"
-
He dlink why doens't it has ipv6?????
Respond now please
-
He dlink why doens't it has ipv6?????
Respond now please
READ (http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=5381.msg85333#msg85333)
-
He dlink why doens't it has ipv6?????
Respond now please
I thought I was blunt... ;D
-
just hover your mouse pointer ;D
-
I thought I was blunt... ;D
He EddieZ what a low speed do you have
-
He EddieZ what a low speed do you have
No need to compensate for other body parts.
But you can do better than that ;)
-
No need to compensate for other body parts.
But you can do better than that ;)
What firmware do you use the EU,NA or WW one. i Know you live in the Netherlands.
-
IPv6 support is mandatory for us, the 655 as well as our current N line is slated for upgrade, but that could change at any second.
To my knowledge most home routers will use a NAT program that allows IPv6 on the WAN and an IPv4 Local network since the NAT is not transparent.
This would make more sense as the average user is already familiar with ipv4 addressing.
-
What firmware do you use the EU,NA or WW one. i Know you live in the Netherlands.
1.34NA.
EU firmware has always been lagging when it comes to updates and beta.
-
I wish there was a consumer available 100/10 fibre to the premise solution in the US.
IT infrastructure is getting better every day, maybe someday soon I will be drooling at a 1000mb in house drop that is suddenly available.
by then you will be burned out like me and not use the 50mb fios line coming into my house ;)
as for the poster saying you need new hardware to implement IPV6 that's nonsense, it's just a linux recompilation to include it and to turn on radvd. as for the docsis cable modem that is a different level than what ip rides on totaly.
-
Honestly, if there is a IPv6 firmware there but it is not released because that could help rise sales... >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
I'll probably get a Netgear and give them the chance to prove they keep up with their customers and do not mess with them because of a single damned deamon not compiled in from the toolbox.
How often are we supposed to replace our 100USD worth pieces of hardware, DLink? Not happy at all on this one.
Please, DLink, if there is anything there, even beta, let us know. We can appreciate your interest providing beta firmware just to let us get the latest and test it for you. This hardware and feature is for geeks willing to pay for good pieces of hardware (when their vendor does not let them down).
-
Well raising sales is one thing however if the devices isn't supported on the network fully, seems like a waste of time. Specially when there are other factors out there, How about SW support? Not all browsers support it at this time. I presume they will in time. And who knows, will be up to the OEMs to figure out whos devices gets IPv6 support or not. Regardless of current or future released products. I do hope they will support some of the current products though. These devices are good. Just hope they will support them for everyone. ::)
I recommend taking a class or picking up a Manual for IPv6 for those wanting or interested in working with IPv6. It's not as easy as IPv4. I hope all the OEMS make it easier for average home users.
-
On the contrary, IPv6 is pretty easy if you don't get too deep into it. The net provides your CPE with the IP and the local prefix. Auto configuration takes care of the rest while the preconfigured FW can deal with most scenarios and open "servers" easily based on the mac part of the ipv6 address.
I am one of those trying to learn fast about it, and bought this expensive hardware because I thought Dlink would not leave it behind so soon being a gigabit wireless N piece of hardware. I was wrong and my expectations on it having ipv6 on the lan and at tunneling on the wan have been dissapointed.
With lazy vendors around, changing the ip version will be a rough ride. I wonder why they do not care about ipv6 given it does not need much development or somewhat better hardware. I'd probably end up giving my dir655 away to a not very loved friend and get a tier one cpe such as cisco or something.
-
Well you certainly can think that vendors are lazy and think that they might not care. I would not care to think like this. Just because vendors have not satisfied end user customers impatience sooner than expected doesn't mean they are not working on this subject.
-
Any update on IPv6 support on N-Series routers?
-
Any update on IPv6 support on N-Series routers?
Most likely you will have to buy a B Hardware Version if you want IPv6 support.
-
I think you are right. Hopefully there will be a new h/w version coming out soon with the native IPv6 support.
-
Could get you one of these: ::)
http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=DSR-500N (http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=DSR-500N)
-
Interesting article:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/how-far-has-the-internet-come-with-ipv6-adoption/967?tag=mantle_skin;content (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/how-far-has-the-internet-come-with-ipv6-adoption/967?tag=mantle_skin;content)
-
:o
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/who-has-and-who-doesn-8217t-have-ipv6-support/981?tag=nl.e539 (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/who-has-and-who-doesn-8217t-have-ipv6-support/981?tag=nl.e539)
-
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/opendns-offers-ipv6-internet-dns-services/1013?tag=mantle_skin;content (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/opendns-offers-ipv6-internet-dns-services/1013?tag=mantle_skin;content)
-
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/229362/what_your_business_can_expect_on_world_ipv6_day.html (http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/229362/what_your_business_can_expect_on_world_ipv6_day.html)
-
http://www.dlink.com/us/en/technology/dlink-ipv6-solutions (http://www.dlink.com/us/en/technology/dlink-ipv6-solutions)
-
Dlink is getting to be one of the worst support companies. anyone that tells me you have to get the B router to have IPV6 is pure BS. it is not the hardware that is the problem it is ONLY the firmware. I have a 8 year old network card that can fully support IPV6 with Linux. The problem is they have not added the support in the Firmware build and thats that. to not support a router after a year or 2 with Firmware is a joke. This will make me switch from Dlink. Their support right now is the worst on the market.
-
You have a B version router?
-
no i have an a REV A router that is the whole point A should have IPV6
-
Guess B is the way to go.
-
but that is not the point you should not have to buy a B router just to get IPV6 this is just poor customer support the A routers were still being sold at the beginning of the year so in all terms DLINK should support them and offer IPV6
-
Probably due to the A version was not certified where the B is.
Well guess we wont know until the fat lady sings.
-
I bet they will support ipv6 with the B revision first then move it into the A line. Either way if they wanted you to buy a new router to get ipv6 that is up to dlink. If you needed a new cable modem to get ipv6 what would you do? You would buy a new one unless you were renting. Same as everything else, you got what you PURCHASED, if a company decides to give you more than you purchased then you benefit.
-
but that is not the point you should not have to buy a B router just to get IPV6 this is just poor customer support the A routers were still being sold at the beginning of the year so in all terms DLINK should support them and offer IPV6
There is a hardware reason there is rev. B: IPv6 support requires more than the rev A can handle.
So not so much not wanting to support. You bought it without IPv6 support or the promise of it being upgraded, so don't be expecting features that weren't there (or promised) in the first place. That's just not realistic, you don't marry a 200 pound woman and then expect her to get perfect 90-60-90 size...