Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news1.tnib.de!feed.news.tnib.de!news.tnib.de!.POSTED.torres.zugschlus.de!not-for-mail
From: Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Anybody Using IPv6?
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 21:21:31 +0200
Organization: private site, see http://www.zugschlus.de/ for details
Message-ID: <100l93s$819p$1@news1.tnib.de>
References: <m91evtFfleU3@mid.individual.net> <100hcra$3nsq7$1@news1.tnib.de> <100hijb$25ta5$5@dont-email.me> <100hl34$3of0i$1@news1.tnib.de> <m935taF8pgbU4@mid.individual.net> <100i89e$19k3$1@news1.tnib.de> <100i92h$2a8rb$3@dont-email.me> <m93p9bF8pgcU12@mid.individual.net> <100ieve$1o3d$1@news1.tnib.de> <m93tqqF8pgcU15@mid.individual.net> <100irbu$2j9c$1@news1.tnib.de> <m94pk5F8pgbU11@mid.individual.net> <100jqfp$4o04$1@news1.tnib.de> <m96geaFprr0U1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 19:21:32 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news1.tnib.de; posting-host="torres.zugschlus.de:81.169.166.32";
	logging-data="263481"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@tnib.de"
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
Bytes: 3665
Lines: 59

"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>On 2025-05-21 08:05, Marc Haber wrote:
>> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2025-05-20 23:14, Marc Haber wrote:
>>>> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-05-20 19:43, Marc Haber wrote:
>>>>>> What does the IPv6 routing table of the system in question say?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't have a problem with the laptop currently. The problem was some
>>>>> years ago, on several computers.
>>>>>
>>>>> cer@Isengard:~> ip route
>>>>> default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth0
>>>>> 192.168.0.0/16 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.16
>>>>> cer@Isengard:~>
>>>>
>>>> That is not the IPv6 routing table.
>>>
>>> That is all there is.
>> 
>> The correct command is ip -6 route.
>> 
>> You don't have the most basic knowledge and still you feel yourself
>> qualified to judge about the protocol. That's Dunning-Kruger at work.
>
>I don't have IPv6, I don't have to remember IPv6 related commands.
>
>cer@Laicolasse:~> ip -6 route
>fe80::/64 dev wlan0 proto kernel metric 1024 pref medium
>cer@Laicolasse:~>

So there is, as expected, only a route for the link local network,
making any connection attempt to a non-local IPv6 address error out
immediately, and a well-behaved application will immediately retry the
next address for the target host. That costs time, but like half a
millisecond or so. You will only notice that in high performance
networking. Your shell prompt wastes more CPU cycles every time it
gets displayed.

>>>> On a slow machine, about a millisecond, yes. That matters in high
>>>> performance computing, where professionals do the administration. It
>>>> does absolutely not matter on a personal workstation that spends 99 %
>>>> of its CPU cycles waiting for keystrokes anyway.
>>>
>>> It is the network speed that matters, which is much slower.
>> 
>> There is zero evidence about IPv6 network speed being slower than IPv4
>> on a feature-par network.
>
>That is not what happened, and not what I said.

What did you say?

Greetings
Marc
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         |   " Questions are the         | Mailadresse im Header
Rhein-Neckar, DE   |     Beginning of Wisdom "     | 
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402