On 12/29/20 7:10 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 29/12/2020 12:44, Tim via users wrote:
The key issue is "need." I'm unaware of anything, so far, that
actually needed IPv6. As yet, I think everything is still accessible
through IPv4 (which is probably why my ISP is dragging their heels on
making IPv6 work).
When I first configured the tunnel I didn't "need" it either. But since the tunnel was free
I figured it was a good opportunity experiment with it and learn about IPv6.
Same for me here.
And in some cases I've seen cloud based services (e.g. videoconferences) use IPv6
to reach the cloud provider datacenters. IPv6 direct reachability in that case
could have skipped a middle box bridging two NATted machines, or maybe a different
routing may have lowered the latency. Hard to tell, but if the software opted
for IPv6 there could have been a preference (maybe as simple as a faster ping test).
Regards.
--
Roberto Ragusa mail at robertoragusa.it
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
