@lizardsquid I've been looking into related questions in the context of mesh networks with exit nodes that give the mesh access to the rest of the Internet. I don't know anything about legal/telecom conditions in Australia, but the big telecoms in the US don't like that idea, which means looking more carefully at what kind of business arrangements ISPs make with each other. (If all goes well, I'll soon have published some background on that topic in an upcoming article.)
IXPs are great for connecting to local networks that aren't run by incumbent telcos / jerks (but I repeat myself ;) ).
getting IPv6 is trivial. IPv4 is slightly harder, and can be pretty expensive depending on your region. Looks like AU gives a /22 to new participants, which solves the bootstrap problem.
I see Hurricane Electric offers IP transit here in Portland and also in Sydney (http://he.net/ip_transit.html), for example… How do you find local transit providers? https://www.peeringdb.com/ is awesome but that's different.
The hard part of launching an ISP seems like connecting customers, anyway. I looked at becoming a DSL reseller, which here gets the Public Utilities Commission involved.
@lizardsquid @jamey and unfortunately, if you're in the US / ARIN region, IPv4 is *very* expensive. ARIN has issued all IPv4 that they have, so you'll have to buy it on the open market. $10-20 per IP, must buy in blocks of 255 (/24 or larger).
You'll need to have at least one /24 v4 block to do anything for real :/
nat64/dns64 at the network edge will take care of that for most things. skype, corporate vpns, and a very small number of other things still break :(.
thankfully, all of the above can be done with open source, so licensing fees won't be a pain :)
@phessler Okay, those are really helpful observations!
Do those apps also break on a dual-stack network where IPv4 addresses are only from non-routable ranges and then NAT'd the usual way at the network edge? I'd have thought Skype et al had to figure out NAT traversal anyway, so is it just that their client apps can't deal with a v6-only network?
Oh, I guess DNS64 would fight with DNSSEC too, hmm.
Thanks so much for indulging my questions (and I hope @lizardsquid is still interested 😅)!
@jamey @lizardsquid dnssec.....is kinda useless :( it isn't verified on the client, only on the resolver. do the check, and as long as the resolver is careful about when it adds the v6 addr, it's fine.
there is a well known nat64 ipv6 prefix, and if you put the destination there, then a paranoid client ought to be able to verify it.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!