6 ms·
Latency wise, I am not noticing any difference (at least in ICMP). ycombinator@Mainframe:~$ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 byte
by HDBaseT 4mo ago
Latency wise, I am not noticing any difference (at least in ICMP).
ycombinator@Mainframe:~$ ping 8.8.8.8
PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=119 time=24.3 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=119 time=24.1 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms
^C
--------------- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --------------------
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 23.901/24.053/24.291/0.157 ms
ycombinator@Mainframe:~$ ping6 2001:4860:4860::8844
PING 2001:4860:4860::8844 (2001:4860:4860::8844) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 2001:4860:4860::8844: icmp_seq=1 ttl=118 time=23.5 ms
64 bytes from 2001:4860:4860::8844: icmp_seq=2 ttl=118 time=24.0 ms
64 bytes from 2001:4860:4860::8844: icmp_seq=3 ttl=118 time=23.9 ms
64 bytes from 2001:4860:4860::8844: icmp_seq=4 ttl=118 time=24.0 ms
^C
------- 2001:4860:4860::8844 ping statistics
-------------------
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3005ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 23.517/23.845/24.008/0.200 ms
- Hendrikto 4mo agoThere is no inherent added latency. That only applies for the translation layer, when there is no native support.
- commandersaki 4mo agoOP was making the case that CGNAT adds to the latency in some significant way. Yes it adds latency, but it is of negligible concern.