At no point has T-Mobile included band 41 in this data.

They also exclude band 5 (which is only in Myrtle Beach, SC), band 13 (only in Puerto Rico), bands n258/n260/n261 (5G mmWave), band 46 (uses the same wireless spectrum as Wi-Fi, T-Mobile has only deployed it in a few spots of some cities), and some bands that T-Mobile has so far only deployed for testing purposes (ex. Band 48, n77) with a larger launch coming in the future.

The data I’m pulling from does include some 2G, 3G, and roaming information, but I decided to exclude that data to avoid the graph becoming too busy and hard to read.

You’re on Google Fi, so that’s not real. You realize being with an MVNO means you’re de-priorotized on the network right?

Afaik Google Fi is actually the only MVNO that isn’t deprioritized on T-Mobile’s network.

T-Mobile’s Ultra Capacity 5G Now Covers 330 Million People

No, it does not.

According to both T-Mobile and the article you linked T-Mobile’s 5G Ultra Capacity covers 300 million people while T-Mobile’s overall 5G network (which includes the much slower and longer range 5G Extended Range) covers 330 million people.

Here’s T-Mobile’s statement yesterday:

300 million Americans now covered by Ultra Capacity 5G, achieving the year-end goal more than two months ahead of schedule, while the total 5G network covers more than 330 million people (98% of Americans)

As I understand, 5G mobile networks are IPv6 native, there is an IPv4 compatibility layer but it’s limited and not useful for my needs.

A few slight nitpicks:

First of all, 5G networks can support both IPv4 and IPv6, it’s just certain carriers (such as T-Mobile) that are IPv6-only.

Secondly, T-Mobile uses a more advanced IPv4 compatibility layer than most other IPv6-only ISPs that avoids most of the normal issues of IPv4 compatibility layers.

I suspect that the cause of your problems is likely T-Mobile’s restrictive, non-configurable, network side firewall. The IPv4 compatibility layer may have contributed to it being implemented this way as the compatibility layer does make other firewall setups more complicated but still possible (with PCP), however I suspect that the main reason it is setup this way is because this setup is fine with cell phones (what T-Mobile’s network was originally designed for) so T-Mobile didn’t see any reason to do anything differently.

It is possible to bypass this firewall using a VPN. In fact T-Mobile Business Internet even offers a VPN that integrates with T-Mobile ISP pretty seamlessly and with minimal latency penalty. Or you can just use a different VPN, but first look into the firewall setup of that VPN. IIRC some users have used the free virtual private servers that Oracle offers to setup their own VPN for this for free, although that’s a bit more advanced.

I replaced spectrum with T-Mobile Home Internet and it mostly works pretty well. Far cheaper than spectrum, even after spectrum offered a temporary better price when we canceled.

I’ve been getting around triple the download bandwidth and eight times the upload bandwidth with lower latency to IPv6 services (IPv4 services have slightly higher latency because T-Mobile’s network is IPv6-only and uses a translation layer to enable IPv4 to work).

Oops, fixed now.

When creating this community I also created !verizon@lemmy.world at the same time and evidently I screwed up some copy and pasting.