3 ms·
Yes, because I want my internal home devices publicly accessible by default. Seriously, the global addressability of ipv6 is something that people used to usin
by manv1 4y ago
Yes, because I want my internal home devices publicly accessible by default.
Seriously, the global addressability of ipv6 is something that people used to using ipv4/NAT tend to forget. I know a bunch of people (well, two) that make a living scanning for IPv6 addresses inside networks that the admins didn't realize were open to the world.
- fulafel 4y agoAddressability != accessability of course.
- sgtnoodle 4y agoI've been trying to embrace IPv6 as much as possible in my home setup. Something funny I noticed, though, is that ICMP ping times are 30ms higher over IPv6 vs. IPv4 between the same two hosts when the packets go over a wireless WDS link. I have yet to explain it.
- kccqzy 4y agoYeah ISPs route IPv4 and IPv6 traffic differently. They are after all independent inter-networks.
- sgtnoodle 4y agoI'm talking about my own traffic inside my LAN, though. It's all switched or bridged at layer 2, without any layer 3 routing. I get 30ms vs. 2ms ping times, where the only difference is the IP version. My current theory is that the WDS link devices' wifi firmware or drivers are doing some sort of packet content based QoS. They see the IPv4 ICMP ping request go by and optimize for return latency. The IPv6 ICMP ping request, on the other hand, doesn't. It's like diesel emissions cheating by having the car detect it's on a dyno...