Fiber and static IP

[madisonreed]

@dane I'm a new Business Fusion Fiber customer here in SF's Mission district. Lots of startups like us are moving to this neighborhood, and we're excited to have much better internet service. Static IP is pretty much a universal feature for other Business internet providers. Please consider adding soon!

[bubba198]

+1

[dranch]

I can appreciate that IPv4 address space is very scarce these days but possibly pooling your remaining space into a CGNAT pool and then getting customers static addresses via static IPv6 addresses would be acceptable as well. Unfortunately, I don't think Sonic officially supports IPv6 either.

--David

[WillAcord]

Just want to add my voice to the request for a static IP option on Fiber

[mazieres]

Having recently switched from Sonic VDSL2 with 8 static IP addresses to Gigabit with none (unfortunately on Wave Broadband, as I'm still waiting for Sonic fiber to make it the last 100 feet to my house), I find that I actually miss two things:

First, the static IP addresses themselves, of course. But really the main downside here is an MTU of 1420 bytes from using a VPN. One nice thing I discovered is that wireguard is way easier to set up than IPSec and OpenVPN, both of which I've used in the past. So actually other than MTU, the VPN is pretty painless if you have a couple of linux boxes at both ends.

Second, having multiple public IP addresses. This turns out to be a bigger deal than I had anticipated, as it means if my router goes down, my whole network goes down. I had previously been running multiple redundant WiFi access points, each on its own static IP address and a different set of WiFi channels. On top of those, I had a server and a couple of super important embedded devices that needed their own static IP addresses, so that I could get into them regardless of the status of the WiFi routers.

So does Sonic at least allow people to have multiple public IP addresses, even if they are dynamically allocated?

BTW, one other thing I miss about Sonic is the IPv6 addresses, which Wave doesn't offer. I ended up just getting a hurricane electric tunnel, only to find other members of my household complaining that NetFlix doesn't work. I presume that Sonic fiber still gives you an IPv6 /60 tunnel that works with Netflix and other geolocating services, so that's nice.

[steelgaze]

Regarding my last post: I was referring to Static IP addresses not being available under Sonic's Fusion Fiber or Fusion Business Fiber product offerings; This is what I was told by the Sonic Sales Rep.

The main point of my post was how an Internet service product can be classified as "Business Class" without a static IP offering.

IMO...
"Business Class" usually means more expensive, 24/7 support/monitoring. Typically sort of service guarantee o minimize downtime. I don't think static IP offering is something that would make or break a "Business Class" tier, or what defines it.

[dranch]

What attracted me to Sonic in the first place was their true support for the power user. They allowed for enduser changes of packet firewalls on their DSL gateways, they offered static IPs on non-business accounts, they allowed their endusers to run servers (email, whatever), they were honest on outages, their impacts, and when things would get fixed. All fantastic things but unfortunately, it doesn't seem like they want to offer the same number of services on their faster offerings. Now that I better understand that their high performance offerings *require* whole-house VPNs which impacts the MTU is pure overhead that shouldn't be required. I believe I understand WHY they are doing this VPN approach but it just confirms to me that these solutions aren't as native as it could be (within AT&T's connectivity offerings).

--David

[dane]

What attracted me to Sonic in the first place was their true support for the power user. They allowed for enduser changes of packet firewalls on their DSL gateways, they offered static IPs on non-business accounts, they allowed their endusers to run servers (email, whatever), they were honest on outages, their impacts, and when things would get fixed. All fantastic things but unfortunately, it doesn't seem like they want to offer the same number of services on their faster offerings. Now that I better understand that their high performance offerings *require* whole-house VPNs which impacts the MTU is pure overhead that shouldn't be required. I believe I understand WHY they are doing this VPN approach but it just confirms to me that these solutions aren't as native as it could be (within AT&T's connectivity offerings).

--David

There's no VPN requirement..? Or do you mean for IPv6?

IPv6 will be native on Fusion Fiber, soon. We're working to resolve a number of vendor implementation interop issues, and of course the team's primary focus has been on deployment, so it's taken us longer than we'd hoped.

[dranch]

Hello Dane,

I appreciate you following this issue but if you rewind in this very thread 16 months ago, you can see that you chimed in. For me, I'm looking for say 25 to 50Mbps with native (not VPNed) support for static IPv4 and IPv6. I understand there might have been some interop issues some time ago but 16 months is a *very* long time to still have NOTHING working for maybe some portions of your network.

--David

[eurekast]

There's a blog post still up that says you get a free static IP with Fusion:

https://corp.sonic.net/ceo/2011/12/13/g ... sonic-net/

If that's not the case, maybe it needs to be fixed.

Me?, I'm getting tired of having to fix whitelisting. If I could at least be in a static /24 that would be good.