@PhoebeEule @marquito solang' ich nicht #DualStack auf allen Anbindungen mit Statischen Addressen bekomme ist bei mir das LAN #IPv4only!
#ipv4only
Wenn das stimmt, dann wäre AIS der erste ISP, der #ipv6only ist.
Etwas komisch an der Sache:
Deren Website ist immernoch #ipv4only . D. h. wenn der Zugang #ipv6only ist, dann wäre es nicht möglich, von einem AIS-Faser-Anschluss die AIS-Website zu erreichen, was ich mir etwas komisch vorstelle.
Magst du mal von AIS aus testen, ob du die Website erreichen kannst?
like obviously ipv4 is a pain, but it's also not that big a deal either it's a legacy thing
There are still devices & software being manufactured & sold that are #IPv4only and will refuse to work if they don't have a static #IPv4 on #WAN.
- And I'm not talking solely about #Devkits and #Enterprise-#Licensing…
#IPv6 is sadly not yet mandated otherwise #CGNAT & bs like #DualStackLite would've never been created.
Du tust mir leid. #IPv4only
@sodiboo I rather want #NAT46 aka. #IPv6+#IPv4 on #WAN and #IPv4only #LAN, because I don't have a provider-independent #IP-Address Space and my #ISP can't be assed to comply with §73 Section 3 Sentence 3 Telecommunications Act so proper Static-IPv6 configuration doesn't work!
- Granted they don't even get IPv6 to work on #WWAN (#LTE), so when #DOCSIS-#Cable is down, I have IPv4-only!
Needless to say the way most vendors implement it is fucking cursed!
If I was @BNetzA I'd mandate every Internet connection to be either #DualStack or at least have a /104 of static IPv6's with every #CGNAT'd device (whilst prosecuting every CGNAT using #RFC1918 address space as computer sabotage for bricking #VPN|s)…
- Alas, they don't…
@bert_hubert
Thank you for sharing the stats.
Unfortunately your fediverse account lives on an #IPv4only instance.
@exponentialverteilt @clf name a competent #ISP that just works on that regard.
- AFAICT none of them do…
Plus I can't do #IPv6only because I still need access to #IPv4only resources.
- And right now all I want is #DualStack wthout exposing LAN hosts!
Does anyone know how to setup #NAT46 on #pfSense within a #LAN?
The Problem is that I want to provide #IPv6-connectivity on #WAN without having to deal with IPv6 in #LAN.
- Right now I'm ponderig using
fc:: /7on #LAN with #DHCPv6 but the problem is that #Vodafone's shitbox connection is flaky af and the only #Fallback that I currently have is their shitty #LTE which is #IPv4only woth #CGNAT in #RFC1918 (10.0.0.0 /8) and no IPv6 connectivity, thus everytime shit flip-flops connectivity is completely gone on IPv6 and only #IPv4 is on that backup link.
So since I don't have a Provider-Independent IP space and my #ISP is so fucking incompetent that I hereby beg @BNetzA to finally seize their network and nationalize/socialize it I am basically stuck on IPv4 connectivity.
The only workarounds I know would necessitate using a #HurricaneElectric #GIF-Tunnel for IPv6 on fallback, which won't work because OFC Vodafone doesn't offer me a static IPv4 or even stazic IPv6-Subnet on their mobile network and I got #DualStack on #WAN on the primary network.
The problem re: routing exists for all #MultiWAN setups and I won't pay for #Vipritnet or setup my own #ASN and blow money on a @ripencc membership just to get PI Address Space and having to setup my own Gateway to VPN into through all my WAN & #WWAN connections.
Also the false premise of many sites to prefer IPv6 over IPv4 causes everything to break apart at the slightest disruption.
- IPv6 really annoys me because unlike IPv4, it just doesn't work and everytime I have to deal with it it's a pain in the ass...
Öhm, Verständnisfrage:
Was passiert, wenn man das neue Outlook in einer Konstellation einsetzt, wo Server und Client inkompatible IP-Versionen nutzen? D. h. Server mit IPv4-only, Client mit IPv6-only, oder umgekehrt.
Tut Microsoft dann dazwischen vermitteln?
Wenn ja, dann gäbe es dafür tatsächlich einen Anwendungsfall.
Moralisch besser wird das Verhalten von M$ dadurch aber nicht.
At #denog17, the people behind #Netzbremse unveiled a new feature: a #speedtest using five different transit providers to (hopefully) uncover unfair peering practices of ISPs, in this case the #DeutscheTelekom #Telekom, but this is very likely helpful for other situations as well. I wanted to dig deeper and found that it uses five different IPv4 prefixes of #Cloudflare that are advertised to different transit providers. Using #HurricaneElectric’s BGP view we get:
- https://bgp.he.net/net/104.29.111.0/24#_graph
- https://bgp.he.net/net/104.29.124.0/24#_graph
- https://bgp.he.net/net/104.29.125.0/24#_graph
- https://bgp.he.net/net/104.29.126.0/24#_graph
- https://bgp.he.net/net/104.29.127.0/24#_graph
I’m not deep enough into the BGP game to understand what transit provider is really pushed for in each prefix.
(unfortunately #IPv4only, I guess they didn’t want to dedicate five /48 prefixes as well for this project).
Link to the speedtest: https://netzbremse.de/speed/
@pepper0 @librecast sadly I have #IPv4only connectivity because my #ISP sucks!
Also ich lese über das Mobilfunknetz von Vodafone regelmäßig meine Emails. Der Mailserver ist #ipv6only. Hast du denn den APN auf Dualstack eingestellt? Nota Bene hierbei: Wenn man den APN auf #ipv6only einstellt, springt Vodafone auf #ipv4only und du bekommst einen unbrauchbaren Zugang (#ipv4only).
@pmevzek @landley I wish I had this luxury.
- Cuz I often have to deal with fucked-up networks that are #IPv4only and sometimes going #DualStack is flatout not being allowed and even having #IPv6 at the public-facing side is seen as a problem.
And I'm more often than not not the guy who gets to make that decision.
Client Info
Server: https://mastodon.social
Version: 2025.07
Repository: https://github.com/cyevgeniy/lmst