IPv4 over IPv6?

[Loukios]

Currently my ISP provides an IPv4 IP through PPPoE which is behind the ISP NAT and it also provides IPv6 native support. Couple of ping tests shows a ~10ms difference between IPv4 and 6. I was wondering if there's a way to tunnel IPv4 over IPv6 to avoid my ISP NAT all together and if this change would actually benefit me in gaming as well in term of ping. My current setup is a modem in bridge mode paired with RT-AX86U. My modem can also be setup to do PPPoE authentication with only IPv6 with DS-lite but it's asking for relay server IP to enable it.

 

[heysoundude]

as much as it pains me to say it, we're not quite there yet.
Changing to a v6 only connection will stop you from seeing a bunch of the internet.
It's not a you thing, it's a them or everybody else thing. all you can do is keep doing what you're doing and talking up ipv6 and specifically talk about where ipv4 fails you/isn't as good.
have you taken the ipv6.he.net/certification? It's free

 

[Tech9]

@Loukios is asking for eventual settings on an Asus router. What is free IPv6 certification helping here? And they don’t want to run IPv6 only.

 

[heysoundude]

@Loukios is asking for eventual settings on an Asus router. What is free IPv6 certification helping here? And they don’t want to run IPv6 only.

is education a bad thing?

 

[sfx2000]

Currently my ISP provides an IPv4 IP through PPPoE which is behind the ISP NAT and it also provides IPv6 native support. Couple of ping tests shows a ~10ms difference between IPv4 and 6. I was wondering if there's a way to tunnel IPv4 over IPv6 to avoid my ISP NAT all together and if this change would actually benefit me in gaming as well in term of ping.

Probably not - we get this question often...

A "tunnel" through IPv6 is going to have to exit somewhere - so while you might be able to "bypass" the NAT, you're adding additional latency, which is contrary to your goal...

Might consider talking to the ISP - they may offer services outside of your default service you have now - doesn't hurt to ask...

 

[Tech9]

is education a bad thing?

No one asked for certification courses here. You with your certification didn't even understand the question. The OP is asking for IPv4 tunneling through IPv6. Not IPv6 only connection to Internet. @sxf2000 above explains why NAT can't be avoided even if 4in6 tunnel was an available option. Not to mention the fact IPv6 implementation on Asus routers is not something you can fully trust based on bugs in firmware experience. I can recommend good theoretical physics course for you, if interested.

 

[Loukios]

Probably not - we get this question often...

A "tunnel" through IPv6 is going to have to exit somewhere - so while you might be able to "bypass" the NAT, you're adding additional latency, which is contrary to your goal...

Might consider talking to the ISP - they may offer services outside of your default service you have now - doesn't hurt to ask...

Don't think anyone in the tech support of my ISP is capable of answering these question or doing anything about it (they hire people to respond only to very basic question according to a script). Well even a tunnel might not be that bad since the routing for my ISP to Europe is very bad and would definitely benefit me.

 

[sfx2000]

Don't think anyone in the tech support of my ISP is capable of answering these question or doing anything about it (they hire people to respond only to very basic question according to a script). Well even a tunnel might not be that bad since the routing for my ISP to Europe is very bad and would definitely benefit me.

Just ask them if you can get a static IPv4 address - simple asks lead to simple answers...

 

[Loukios]

Just ask them if you can get a static IPv4 address - simple asks lead to simple answers...

They do provide static IPv4 addresses. Would that help? How?

 

[Tech9]

I have played quite a bit with IPv4 and IPv6 and never observed latency difference on my ISPs. Your ISP situation is rather unusual. High server load or inefficient routing. You need IPv4 and can't improve latency on your end. Even if it was possible 4in6 tunnel would be slower. Public or static IPv4 address from the same ISP won't change anything.

 

[Loukios]

High server load or inefficient routing

Probably both. My old ISP (which is new and not too many people subed to it) had really good ping. I tried ExitLag (which supposedly changes your routing to optimized one) and it changed my ping to Paris from 62 to 35 (on old ISP I had 31ms).

 

[RMerlin]

I have difficulties understanding why there would be any latency difference between IPv4 and IPv6, since either traffic should be going through the same routers and the same routes.

 

[Loukios]

I have difficulties understanding why there would be any latency difference between IPv4 and IPv6, since either traffic should be going through the same routers and the same routes.

Could be because IPv6 here isn't as used as IPv4. Probably very few people have access to it let alone utilise it. Also the fact that IPv4 is routed through my ISP's NAT while IPv6 doesn't.

 

[RMerlin]

Could be because IPv6 here isn't as used as IPv4. Probably very few people have access to it let alone utilise it. Also the fact that IPv4 is routed through my ISP's NAT while IPv6 doesn't.

IPv4 and IPv6 aren't separate "pipelines". It's just a different addressing scheme within the packets.

NAT shouldn't make a 10ms performance difference either.

Something must be seriously wrong with that ISP.

 

[heysoundude]

No one asked for certification courses here. You with your certification didn't even understand the question. The OP is asking for IPv4 tunneling through IPv6. Not IPv6 only connection to Internet. @sxf2000 above explains why NAT can't be avoided even if 4in6 tunnel was an available option. Not to mention the fact IPv6 implementation on Asus routers is not something you can fully trust based on bugs in firmware experience. I can recommend good theoretical physics course for you, if interested.

only if it's as much "certification" as HE's so I can be an (internet) expert like you.
One of these days we'll be censured for our sniping...

 

[Tech9]

No issues @heysoundude, but HE free certification is not helping in this case. This is not IPv4 vs IPv6 conversation.

 

[sfx2000]

NAT shouldn't make a 10ms performance difference either.

the operative word is "shouldn't" - but sometimes it does - 5G-Fixed Wireless per T-Mobile down here in the US, IPv4 is not CGNAT'ed - rather it's 464XLAT, and the PLAT/CLAT applications for IPv4 can be troublesome for apps that are latency sensitive...

T-Mobile just does the IPv4 tunnel out to the internet - so IPv4 only applications will take a hit... IPv6 is fine with 5G-FWA, as most carriers in 5G space are IPv6 native...

 

[Tech9]

I don't think this is the case here, @sfx2000. I don't know how the OP measured the latency either.

 

[sfx2000]

I don't think this is the case here, @sfx2000. I don't know how the OP measured the latency either.

Just bringing up a point that folks do need to be IPv6 aware... esp when dealing with things like CGNAT or other migration mechanisms...

I've still got a public IPv4 address on my broadband, but who knows for how long?

 

[RMerlin]

the operative word is "shouldn't" - but sometimes it does - 5G-Fixed Wireless per T-Mobile down here in the US, IPv4 is not CGNAT'ed - rather it's 464XLAT, and the PLAT/CLAT applications for IPv4 can be troublesome for apps that are latency sensitive...

But a whole 10 ms latency difference?