Just wondering what people think of IPv6. I disabled it on my network adapter and disabled services associated with it. My speeds are great with it disabled. I think they slow somewhat with it enabled, it might be in the testing though. I've seen allot of people say it's worthless but I've also been seeing where some ISPs are using it now. What does everyone else think?
You should rather embrace IPv6 not disabling it. However that default MS tunnel for IPv6 is kinda useless, more down then up and always with issues. Get your self some proper IPv6 tunnel (if you ISP does not support IPv6 yet and offer dual stack) like Sixxs or HE. Im runing dualstack IPv4 (over my ISP) and IPv6 (over Sixxs tunnel) for over a year and its great... also over Sixxs tunnel i can reach almost my maximum ISP speeds (20/20 mbit) since im using local tunnel, for what i cant claim about that default crappy MS tunnel it creates. I even went that far that i disable that adapter during unattended Win install. Im runing Linux router that is also DHCP server for statefull configuration and routes all IPv6 traffic over tunnel. Big benifit on IPv6 is, no more NAT and opening crappy ports since even behind router your IPv6 with all ports is exposed to whole internet (if you wish). Some people might not see this as benifit tho
Thats what I'm wondering. I doubt whether my router even supports it; let alone my ISP. I know with XP it somehow adapts IPv6 to IPv4 if you install the 6. I didn't see any services listed for this other than IPhelper. Edit- Google is a wonderful thing. thanks for the program mentions
Default tunnel in Win7 that takes care about IPv6 is named Teredo tunnel. So search about that as well, but like i said, totaly unreliable. Otherwise there is big FAQ on sixxs home page with all install instructions etc. Main issue is why people shouldnt avoid IPv6 and try to learn as much as possible about it is, because in 2 years we run out of IPv4 address space. So sooner or later we will need to adopt IPv6 and then we will probably need run dual stack (IPv4&IPv6) for 10 years, however we will probably mostly have IPv6 as default with IPv4 tunnels and not other way around like we do not... so bottom line, we should adopt IPv6 sooner rather then later, when we will be forced in to it.
Another quick ?. Should flow control be enabled or disabled for best speed?? I went ahead with windows default IPv6 and speed dropped a little from last test. Before 2.5Mb/26Mb ; After 2.2Mb/19.7Mb , but these always vary somewhat anyways.
Well that depends. I have it disabled, however you need to enable it if you notice any issues. Flow control is changing recive window size, so you dont get flooded with data.
Im sure most of people will say "eh just keei it enabled from start", thing is i dont like automatic options that can potentialy screws up my system preformance... its one of those "old fashioned way" i need to get rid off Im sure flow control is compleatly fine, i just dont like it, because its autmatic recive window size manipulation.
Yeah but packet size is already limited by routers as far as I know so not much point. On the other hand the more I find out about things the dumber I get .........lmao
Don't agree with it being totally un-reliable. It works fine for application to application purposes as intended. And with some tweaking you can make it work for IPV6 browsing and IPV6 Usenet just fine. And now that HE is deploying several Teredo relays it works even better.
Team, Just my opinion: I keep it enabled as default as I run multiple machines and I use Remote Desktop. By default RD uses IPv6 so if I lose Internet connectivity (like when the modem is not providing DHCP) I can always connect to my other machines (headless Windows 2008 R2 server). It is true that until IPv6 is embraced by the (scumbag) telcos it is virtually useless on the Intarwebs. Sooooooonn!!!!!