Actually that's not accurate - at least for my Comcast experience. I use the last AirPort Extreme and get full IPV6. When I go to http://ip6tools.com/check_client.php , it shows both an IPV4 and IPV6 address, If I got to http://www.ipv6-test.com , I get 19/20 (since Comcast isn't providing reverse DNS). Asking Google at http://ipv6test.google.com gives a green checkmark. And I can visit https://ipv6.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl without any trouble.

I'd love to switch to eero but there is no way I'm going to go backwards when I have full ipv6 connectivity now. I'll wait, or select a different manufacturer.

I agree. IPv6 support is important and Eero needs to implement it. Currently, Time Warner + Apple Airport works perfectly. Time Warner hands a /64 to the Airport and the Airport hands IPv6 addresses to every connected device.

I found it somewhat troubling to receive a response today from Eero support stating that IPv6 support "is not currently on the road map",

rcrcr Now THAT is positively scary. At this point, I'm hoping that Orbi (Netgear) will support QOS (as of the last Mac Geek Gab podcast they didn't). If they do, that's probably the correct solution if Eero can't be bothered to implement full IPv6 support.

Agreed, I am having to rethink a slew of recent referrals. I knew that IPv6 was not yet implemented but had no idea that it wasn't even forthcoming.

For a device that is supposed to be leading edge and so highly reviewed, I was surprised to find out that is eero is not currently capable of supporting IPv6.  It's time to focus on the technology as well as sales!

Jeff C. I'm already at a point where a good chunk of my traffic is IPv6. I'm on Comcast, and yes they are dual-stack. I guess I can't see the point in taking a step backwards when I have a fully-funcitonal, working IPv6 stack. My AirPort Extreme is working fine at the moment (though I'd love QOS), but I won't compromise on technology by going backwards to something that doesn't fully support IPv6.

Jeff C.  – thanks so much for the response on this. A few things:

(1) an eero support rep did state to me clearly (in writing) that IPv6 wasn't "currently on the roadmap". It sounds like that is incorrect, which I am very glad to hear. However, you might want to correct that assumption with your support staff. Happy to follow up privately with more details of the specific message I received from your staff if that is helpful.

(2) Currently (with eeros in bridge mode) I am personally using dual stack IPv4/IPv6 in a number of scenarios. In all of them, IPv6 addresses are being assigned (by an Apple AirPort Extreme) to all devices on the LAN from a /64 that is being allocated from the residential ISP. These are publicly routable addresses and I do use them for inbound reachability of individual devices on the LAN from the outside world, without the need for any NAT or port forwarding on the IPv6 side of the dual stack.

(3) A higher percentage of residential ISP customers are already receiving IPv6 blocks than I believe has been expressed by some folks earlier on this thread. I can personally attest to Time Warner (now Spectrum) handing /64 blocks to customer gateways in both California and New York, and to Comcast doing the same in Texas.

(4) In my opinion, any Eero implementation of IPv6 should fully implement DHCPv6 allocation of publicly routable WAN addresses to every device on the LAN that requests one. (I could see an optional feature which blocks inbound traffic for those folks who have gotten used to the somewhat incorrect assumption that IPv4 NAT == firewall, but this feature should be _optional_ so that those who want to route inbound WAN traffic directly to devices without NAT can do so without issue.)

(5) Apple has actually done a pretty great job of this with Airport. LAN devices which request IPv6 addresses from the Airport get two IPv6 WAN addresses from the /64 which the ISP gave the Airport. One permanent and one temporary. The temporary address is continually deprecated and cycled on a relatively short lease time. The permanent address does not change. Outbound IPv6 traffic from the LAN device sources from the the temporary address so that user tracking over time is more difficult. However, the device can always be reached inbound at its permanent address, which does not change. I would suggest looking at this implementation if eero is still in the design/planning stages of its own implementation.

Happy to discuss further if any of the above needs clarification, raises questions, or sparks any interest. ;)

I currently use an Apple Airport Extreme (ac model) with Webpass in San Francisco.  Full dual-stack, with dhcpv6 for the lan-side /64.

Lack of IPv6 is the reason why I'm not buying eero gear.  Will be first in line to order once it has full and stable support.

Jeff C. 

Hey Jeff!

Thanks for the response. My previous ISP was dual-stack for ipv4 and v6. My previous router had good ipv6 support. I found that the v6 network on my isp (Time Warner NYC) performed much better than their v4 network for both latency and throughput. I'm guessing this is mostly due to newer hardware and lower congestion. 

I do like that ipv6 allows me to directly access my home machines without NAT. I would love to have that same feature on the eero, but in the meantime port forwarding will do.

TWC/Spectrum NY customer here.  I agree with others that the v6 performance is really pretty good.  Although IPv6 isn't critical for me, it's definitely being implemented more and more, and I feel like I've gone back in that one case since moving to Eero (though I really like the Eeros in pretty much all other respects...)

Jeff C. 

IPv6 on WAN and LAN.  DHCPv6 and SLAAC, Stateless auto-config on the LAN, DNS, etc.  Comcast is fully v6 in my area and uses the standard config. 

TWC/Spectrum here uses full ipv6 for the network, would be nice to take advantage of it.  Have ipv6 capable devices on my internal network that I would love to take advantage of too.

+1 please add

Yeah, this is a major let down. I bought into eero thinking I was getting the top of the line, and now I'm unable to browse the ipv6 web. Very disappointed.

I decided to return it. Too many items on the to-do list. May revisit after these requests are fulfilled 

Jumping on this bandwagon here.  Recently moved from California to Colorado, and I guess out there they're pushing things through ipv6 more heavily.  Twice now over night my entire network comes down to the point where I am factory resetting cable modem (from xfinity) and my entire eero setup.  really frustrating....

agree with previous posters that I thought my eero setup was supposed to be top of the line and leading edge technology, so this just seems like a big oversight by product managers