Ipv6 or not ipv6?

[dave14305]

It used to be possible and enjoyable to discuss, debate, prove/disprove technical topics on this forum. Just proves you can’t go home again…

 

[Christos]

Be sure that one day, your ISP will force you to CGNAT, then you will panic and run to IPv6 without been properly prepared.
ISPs don't like to support 2 networks. They shut down 3G, they forced user to VoIP etc
So, why don't you spend some time now learning and testing IPv6, instead of fighting it?

 

[drinkingbird]

Be sure that one day, your ISP will force you to CGNAT, then you will panic and run to IPv6 without been properly prepared.
ISPs don't like to support 2 networks. They shut down 3G, they forced user to VoIP etc
So, why don't you spend some time now learning and testing IPv6, instead of fighting it?

Dual stack isn't two networks, and none of the major ISPs are anywhere near having to force CGNAT or anything else. FIOS still doesn't even have v6 rolled out everywhere, if anything they'd rather stay on v4 only.

Most people wouldn't even be impacted by CGNAT, and the ones that would be probably have a decent understanding of v6 anyway.

Decommissioning cellular radios and frequencies in order to free up spectrum for faster, higher profit service is a totally different scenario.

Nobody is saying don't use v6. However the average user shouldn't just be turning it on because someone tells them it is faster or better without having a very good understanding of it (or a specific need for it). Especially on cheap home oriented wifi routers.

The OP is a perfect example. They are not having any issues or limitations, just have gotten the idea that it is somehow better and admit a lack of knowledge about it. That is the exact scenario I'll recommend not enabling v6 10 times out of 10. That is the responsible thing to do.

 

[drinkingbird]

It used to be possible and enjoyable to discuss, debate, prove/disprove technical topics on this forum. Just proves you can’t go home again…

Tech9 must be on a timeout if he hasn't chimed in.

 

[coxhaus]

I wonder if pfSense ever sorted out the issues they had with IPv6 - some of this wasn't directly on them, as ISP's differ on their side for implementation purposes as well...

First thing I do is turn off IPv6. It is more mature in the latest Cisco devices I have bought than the early ones I bought 15 years ago.

Aren't they working on something newer than IPv6?

 

[L&LD]

I've posted my whole methodology. See if you can't replicate it yourself, it's easy. Customers can sometimes see a difference too (albeit, not all of them), but most of them are not technically inclined either.

Running pings to a server I don't want anything to do with isn't how I use my network. I use it to get things done. With IPv6, it's faster, period, for me.

Do with it what you will.

But don't hide behind some lame 'proof' numbers that don't mean crap. Nor in some bogus security issues that I haven't seen in the half-decade or more, I'm using IPv6 now.

How about you show us how insecure and not faster IPv6 is? The ball is in your court. Let's see you play.

Where is third-party (trusted) information that supports your theory?

 

[dave14305]

But don't hide behind some lame 'proof' numbers that don't mean crap.

Trust the science.

 

[sfx2000]

Well - depends on the provider and the router/AP whether IPv6 is useful or not...

As I have mentioned in the past - I've got two broadband providers - one does full dual-stack and a great IPv6 solution (CoxHSI) and one that is IPv6 first with IPv4 being handled via 464XLAT and a slightly broken IPv6 stack - use their GW and things are fine with clients, but TMHI for routers, well that's a challenge...

Synology on their routers - for the most part, they hit all the possible options for IPv6 WAN... this is SRM 1.3...

For me on CoxHSI - DHCPv6-PD works...

 

[drinkingbird]

Well - depends on the provider and the router/AP whether IPv6 is useful or not...

As I have mentioned in the past - I've got two broadband providers - one does full dual-stack and a great IPv6 solution (CoxHSI) and one that is IPv6 first with IPv4 being handled via 464XLAT and a slightly broken IPv6 stack - use their GW and things are fine with clients, but TMHI for routers, well that's a challenge...

Synology on their routers - for the most part, they hit all the possible options for IPv6 WAN... this is SRM 1.3...

For me on CoxHSI - DHCPv6-PD works...

View attachment 51524

I think PD is what asus calls "native". Honestly that's the only way it should ever be used, automatically assign WAN and LAN subnets from a single /48 or /64 or whatever they are giving (and ISPs should also give you a static block for as long as you are a customer, IPv6 was basically designed to require that). But we know they'll never do that without making you pay for it. Somewhat absurd to expect all your devices to totally change IPs if you lose your lease.

That's actually one of the biggest issues I see with v6, the fact that you can't get a static block on a residential connection and have to turn to ULA and effectively NAT everything.

When I ran it for real I had business class with both static v4 and v6 so it was doable. I also had multiple layers of enterprise routers and firewalls. Right now, it is off, and will stay off (other than LLA on the LAN obviously). No need for it.

 

[ddaenen1]

I test it by switching IPv4/6 on and off in my interface settings.
Specially in the beginning last year i was curious if i would notice speed difference.
Not that it was that important.
The most fun was in the learning and the step by step going forward and thank god it was not that difficult as i always thought.

Well you surely have tickled my curiosity again

 

[L&LD]

Trust the science.

Haven't seen it.