u/haElwKfeiow6

The lack of reliable high speed internet affects thousands of Frederick County residents. That is not an exaggeration. It limits access to ordinary parts of daily life that now depend on a reliable connection.

The deadline for eComments is Wednesday, August 12 at 12:00 PM (noon).

Frederick County residents can still submit an online public comment for the upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting on Wednesday, August 12, 2026.

The broadband update is on the agenda as item 8.A, Update on the Regional Broadband Project. However, the public comment box appears under:

5. Citizen Comments - For agenda items that are not the subject of a Public Hearing

Your comment goes to the Board at large.

eComment link:

https://fcva.granicusideas.com/meetings/1130-board-of-supervisors

If you have had trouble getting clear updates, if your address moved to a different funding timeline, or if you just want better public reporting, now is the time to say so.

Important note: I had trouble getting the verification email. A Gmail address did work for me, but the verification email went to spam/junk, so check there.

Below is a short comment you can copy and edit:

I am submitting this comment under Citizen Comments because it relates to agenda item 8.A, Update on the Regional Broadband Project.

Reliable high speed internet is critical infrastructure, and the lack of it affects thousands of Frederick County residents. This project needs clearer public reporting and stronger accountability from All Points Broadband.

I want the regional broadband project to succeed, but residents need current county level information. Public updates should explain what has been completed, what remains unfinished, which locations are serviceable, which locations moved to BEAD funding, what the current timeline is, and what is causing delays.

Please require All Points Broadband and the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission to provide meaningful progress updates, and please publish the supporting reports, maps, timelines, presentations, and status materials on the County's broadband Information Hub page.

Residents should not have to piece together the status of a publicly funded critical infrastructure project from old meeting videos, press releases, state dashboards, and documents posted by other counties.

This is public money and critical infrastructure. Residents can handle complexity and delays, but they deserve clear, regular, official information.

Frederick County followed through and created a status page for the All Points Broadband project. Thank you to everyone who contacted their supervisor!
https://www.fcva.us/services/news-information/broadband-access

Writing your representatives works! Below are their contact information and an easy to copy and paste template to make it as easy as possible.

I called All Points Broadband, gave the person my address and he still said it could happen by September (doubtful).
I also asked "How many addresses in Frederick County are currently active or serviceable?"
The rep said, "Oh a ton, yeah probably hundreds."
I then mentioned that it is concerning that All Points Broadband is not providing updates to the county.

I have emailed Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission (twice) and would recommend anyone wanting this project to be successful to do the same.
info@nsvregion.org

I have contacted my state representatives, you should as well.

STATE DELEGATE - William D. (Bill) Wiley - DelBWiley@house.virginia.gov

STATE SENATOR - Timmy French - senatorfrench@senate.virginia.gov

U.S. CONGRESS - Ben Cline - https://cline.house.gov/contact/

U.S. SENATOR - Tim Kaine - https://www.kaine.senate.gov/contact/share-your-opinion

U.S. SENATOR - Mark Warner - https://www.warner.senate.gov/contact/write-to-mark/

Governor's Office - https://www.governor.virginia.gov/constituent-services/contact-the-governors-office/

Template message (feel free to copy and paste):

Hello,

I am a Frederick County resident writing about the All Points Broadband project.

I support the effort to bring reliable fiber internet to underserved areas of Frederick County, and I want this project to succeed. However, I am concerned about the lack of clear public information, the missed or uncertain timeline, and whether All Points Broadband is communicating adequately with Frederick County, the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission, and residents.

Frederick County has now created a broadband status page, which is a helpful step:

https://www.fcva.us/services/news-information/broadband-access

However, residents still need clear answers about the actual status of the project, including:

- Where work is currently active in Frederick County

- How many addresses are currently serviceable

- How many residents have actually been connected

- Whether the September 2026 timeline is still realistic

- What areas are delayed

- What milestones remain

- Whether All Points Broadband is providing timely and accurate updates

- What accountability measures are in place if All Points Broadband misses the deadline

The Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development's FY2026 Q3 VATI Quarterly Performance Report lists the Northern Shenandoah Valley Regional Commission / All Points Broadband project as "High Risk." That is concerning, especially because residents have been waiting for years and public funds have been committed.

I am not asking for additional spending. I am asking for transparency, accountability, and realistic public reporting.

Please support regular written public updates, stronger oversight of All Points Broadband, and clear accountability measures if the project is delayed further.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

I think with 25.5.2 Apple added the ability for iOS and iPadOS to see Apple Content Caching servers.

It is located in Wi-Fi details (i) > scroll to the bottom > Content Content Caches

For the macOS side of things it's the less pretty Terminal command: AssetCacheLocatorUtil

If you don't have one setup I would highly recommend it. The screenshots are from my home setup, not the work one that has multiple public IP ranges and DNS TXT record set to favor.

Happy to answer any questions. Below is a link to the Apple guide.

https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/intro-to-content-caching-depde72e125f/web

As someone who manages Apple Content Caching for work and home I was very happy to see this under Wi-Fi details (at the bottom).

I submitted a request through the "Contact Us" page asking UniFi to consider Matter camera support for UniFi Protect.

Matter 1.5.1 specification page: https://handbook.buildwithmatter.com/specification/

I just went through the process of setting up UniFi Protect to work with HomeBridge, along with Alarm Manager with webhooks for sensors....... it was a hassle.

This would be a great feature for home users who want high quality PoE cameras and local first recording, while also gaining broader smart home interoperability through Matter.

It also seems like something that could help UniFi stand out, especially if they ever used a Matter bridge approach instead of trying to make every camera a completely standalone Matter device.

If this is something you would want too, consider sending them a short request through the contact us page. Feedback helps show there is real interest.

Below is a template anyone can copy and paste:

Please consider adding Matter camera support to UniFi Protect.

I think this would be especially useful for home users because it would let UniFi customers keep the UniFi camera quality and local storage while also gaining standards based interoperability with Matter smart home ecosystems.

This could also help set UniFi apart from both home and enterprise competitors by combining premium local-first cameras with broader smart home compatibility.

I am posting this for two reasons:
- I want feedback on the methodology.
- I want to help other people do fair and less biased Wireshark captures when comparing IPv4 and IPv6.

My organization has a “/40” block (since 2012); that being said, we don’t really use it unless someone requests it, which is unfortunate. I’ve been trying to demonstrate to my organization that when given the choice (dual stack) devices and applications, for the most part, prefer IPv6, especially since we have a "cloud first" mentality.

I wanted facts and data to strengthen my argument, so I turned to Wireshark (what an amazing resource, and it’s free). I treated it like a research question: Which protocol gets used for real internet traffic when both are available?

I quickly realized that capturing everything is misleading. If you just capture raw traffic, the results get skewed...

This capture filter is designed to isolate only off network / internet bound traffic for a fair IPv4 vs IPv6 comparison. It excludes internal traffic by dropping packets only when both the source and destination are inside organization-owned address space, while preserving bidirectional traffic between hosts and external internet destinations. It also removes ARP, link-local, multicast, and broadcast traffic, which are local-network mechanisms and would otherwise bias the results.

In other words: internal to internal gets dropped, internal to internet stays, internet to internal stays.

I’ll put easy to read version of the capture filters at the top, and then a copy and paste version at the bottom.

Once the capture is done, go to: Statistics > Protocol Hierarchy. This will give you the protocol distribution.

I redacted the public IPv4 and IPv6 ranges using x placeholders for privacy. I intentionally left the subnet sizes visible because the mask lengths (/16, /25, /24, /40, /56) are important to understanding how the filter works.

Capture filter for at home:

(ip or ip6)

and not arp

and not (ip and src net 10.0.0.0/23 and dst net 10.0.0.0/23)

and not (ip and net 169.254.0.0/16)

and not (ip6 and src net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xx00::/56 and dst net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xx00::/56)

and not (ip6 and net fe80::/10)

and not (ip and dst net 224.0.0.0/4)

and not (ip6 and dst net ff00::/8)

and not broadcast

Capture filter for organization:

For this filter I had to account for the following: one private IPv4 space example: 10.0.0.0/8, three public IPv4 ranges, specifically: /16, /25, /24, and one IPv6 prefix at /40.

(ip or ip6)

and not arp

and not (

  ip and (

(src net 10.0.0.0/8 and dst net 10.0.0.0/8)

or (src net xxx.xxx.0.0/16 and dst net xxx.xxx.0.0/16)

or (src net xxx.xxx.xxx.128/25 and dst net xxx.xxx.xxx.128/25)

or (src net xxx.xxx.xxx.0/24 and dst net xxx.xxx.xxx.0/24)

  )

)

and not (

  ip6 and (

src net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::/40 and dst net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::/40

  )

)

and not (ip and net 169.254.0.0/16)

and not (ip6 and net fe80::/10)

and not (ip and dst net 224.0.0.0/4)

and not (ip6 and dst net ff00::/8)

and not broadcast

Copy & paste versions for Wireshark

(ip or ip6) and not arp and not (ip and src net 10.0.0.0/23 and dst net 10.0.0.0/23) and not (ip and net 169.254.0.0/16) and not (ip6 and src net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xx00::/56 and dst net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xx00::/56) and not (ip6 and net fe80::/10) and not (ip and dst net 224.0.0.0/4) and not (ip6 and dst net ff00::/8) and not broadcast

(ip or ip6) and not arp and not (ip and ((src net 10.0.0.0/8 and dst net 10.0.0.0/8) or (src net xxx.xxx.0.0/16 and dst net xxx.xxx.0.0/16) or (src net xxx.xxx.xxx.128/25 and dst net xxx.xxx.xxx.128/25) or (src net xxx.xxx.xxx.0/24 and dst net xxx.xxx.xxx.0/24))) and not (ip6 and (src net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::/40 and dst net xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::/40)) and not (ip and net 169.254.0.0/16) and not (ip6 and net fe80::/10) and not (ip and dst net 224.0.0.0/4) and not (ip6 and dst net ff00::/8) and not broadcast

Using these methods I have observed:

- IPv6 often dominates; I have seen over 90% in some runs.

- Results will vary! What apps you’re using, which sites/services you hit, and CDN behavior.

My questions:

Does this filtering approach look sound?

Am I missing any sources of bias?

Has anyone done large scale measurements like this?

Thanks for reading this far.

Useful Links:

https://wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureFilters

https://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsug_html_chunked/ChStatHierarchy.html

https://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsug_html_chunked/ChCapCaptureFilterSection.html

https://www.wireshark.org/docs/man-pages/pcap-filter.html