= Сообщение: 5386 из 7402 ============================================= IPV6 = От : Tony Langdon 3:633/410 13 Apr 18 12:41:00 Кому : Bj”rn Felten 13 Apr 18 12:41:00 Тема : Re: Tunnel vs. native IPv6 FGHI : area://IPV6?msgid=531.fido-ipv6@3:633/410+1f355333 На : area://IPV6?msgid=2:203/2+5acfeca2 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: WINDOWS-1252 =========================== Ответ: area://IPV6?msgid=2:203/2+5ad0953a ============================================================================== -=> Bj”rn Felten wrote to All <=-
BF> Now with fibre where I get better than 100/100M I can clearly see that BF> a tunnel is much slower than native IPv6.
BF> On http://www.bredbandskollen.se/ I can measure the speed I get, and BF> via my IPv6 tunnel I get less than 20% of the speed I get on IPv4.
Ouch! :( I can't reproduce these results here, as I run native IPv6.
BF> So, I'm eagerly awaiting my native IPv6.
I bet! :D
BF> It would also be interesting to know if the above test site works BF> for sites from outside of Sweden. To get the IPv6 test choose BF> "Avancerad m„tning" in the right hand menu and there select one of the BF> IPv6 endpoints.
Can take a look, though from this side of the world, there's a lot of variables in the way. Well, it does work, at least on the default site. but as expected, the results were poor - around 3.5Mbps each way, compared to 78.14/31.25, using a local speedtest.net server.
