Just added #IPv6 ping to my monitoring of my home connection (from an external host). Interesting to see it’s about 1.6ms quicker than IPv4.
@jamesoff@mastodon.jamesoff.net the networking for IPv6 is typically drastically simpler, especially if you normally have NAT or god forbid CGNAT with NAT at your home router too... all that IP packet translation gets slow and gross super fast
@froge This is from an EC2 instance (in London) to my router’s external IPs, so it’s traversing AWS VPC stuff (which is basically NAT) for v4 at least. The home side is pretty vanilla AFAIK, I'm on @aaisp :)
I remember years ago people talking about a benefit of the v6 Internet being it was less congested, not sure how much that still applies!
@jamesoff @froge @aaisp at the physical network level both are the same, e.g. ethernet packets to MAC addresses, although some places may run separate (single stack) networks, so I think "congestion" isn't relevant.
The main speed benefit of #ipv6 is avoiding multiple levels of NAT.
On top of the ping to your router, for outbound calls there would also be NAT on your router; or for inbound port redirects.
Inbound (or outbound) IPv6 to an end device is just a firewall check, and then forward. Also makes it easy to use 80/443 for multiple end devices. (Rather than non standard ports)
