315
It's easier to remember the IPs of good DNSes, too. (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 2 years ago* by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
186 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Today in our newest take on "older technology is better": why NAT rules!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Lol that's ridiculous. There's nothing about ipv6 that'd make it any slower

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    There's one practical thing. Routers have had years to optimize IPv4 routing, which has to be redone for IPv6. Same with networking stacks in general.

    In theory, IPv6 should be faster by not having to do bullshit like CGNAT. There's every reason to think it'll match that advantage if we just make it happen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    In the USA, around 50% of Google traffic and 60% of Facebook traffic goes over IPv6. The largest mobile carriers in the US are nearly entirely IPv6-only too (customers don't get an IPv4 address, just an IPv6 one), using 464XLAT to connect to legacy IPv4-only servers. I'm sure we'd know if routing with IPv6 was slower. Google's data actually shows 10ms lower latency over IPv6: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent