XMPP Service Operators - 2021-06-01

I might switch registrars, not right away but if I can find one that lets my set my own glue and dnssec I'll be happy ✏

x0n: interesting tidbits regarding bridging on Matrix https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/224#note_589355557

are there stats of % servers that support IPv6?

there aren't even stats on % of servers

🙁

You could ask the operators of huge servers how's there percentage of v6 s2s connections.

Martin, I have stats on v4/v6 for sjn

Харпер ^

jonas’, do you have a ballpark number?

approximately 50:50 IPv4/IPv6

interestingly, outbound I have more IPv4 than IPv6

but that the connection is established via v4 does not neccessarily mean that v6 is not supported

hmm, thank you

If you're looking at s2c stuff as well, or maybe individual' servers, VPNs sometimes block ipv6 and only tunnel through ipv4.

» <thndrbvr> If you're looking at s2c stuff as well, or maybe individual' servers, VPNs sometimes block ipv6 and only tunnel through ipv4. why?

that'd seem like the exact opposite of what a cpn company would want to do

how are they getting all that legacy address space anyhow? It's not like ARIN has anymore to give any everybody else is clutching onto their /24s for dear life

NAT

he said the evil word! ✏

et ceterum censeo NAT delendam esse

gosh, that must be expensive to do

not only do you have all the crypto overhead at gigabit speeds per connection, but you've got a MASSIVE multi-gigabit nat too

with thousands of users

also

wow that' a shitty vpn

not even getting a publicly rout-able address

tom, high performance NAT is unfortunately a solved issue (carrier grade nat is a thing)

do you mean hardware offloaded nat?

tom, if the entire selling point of your VPN is "privacy" then you WANT all users to share 1 ipv4 with NAT, not each get their own address

your still going to run out of sports aren't you?

moparisthebest: I think that's kind of silly

tom, I do too but that's what it is

what's not private about transient but unique publicly routable addressing

also

that's really not a long term bussiness solution, and it's causing a massive headache for us infra and server operators as we have to operate our own nats and pay to rent ipv4s from people who still have some

for ever-increasing prices

some people paying as high as 10 dollars per v4 now

i pay about half that, but still

i've said this before but it ought to be a lot for ISPs to HAVE to provide native ipv6 with any broadband internet service

otherwise, there's simply no address space left for new businesses and competitors to spring up

we all have to pay the legacy incumbent feee

tom, no, connections are quadruples (srcip, sport, dstip, dport), not pairs. you cannot run out of sports that easily ✏

just have your users run bittorrent

that's what people pay for vpns for anyways right?

i need to look more into cgnat

» » +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------------+----------+ » | Test | Single | Single | Dual | Dual ISP, | Notes | » | Scenario | ISP, | ISP, | ISP, | One HN+One | | » | (per Test | Single | Two | One HN | User on | | » | Plan) | HN, | HN, | with | ISP-A, Two | | » | | Single | Single | One | HN with One | | » | | User | User | User | User on Each | | » | | | on | on | on ISP-B | | » | | | Each | Each | | | » | | | | ISP | | | » +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------------+----------+ » | Video | Pass | Pass | Pass | Pass | fails | » | streaming | | | | | behind | » | over Netflix | | | | | one | » | | | | | | router | » +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------------+----------+ » | Video | Pass | Pass | Pass | Pass | | » | streaming | | | | | | » | over YouTube | | | | | | » +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------------+----------+ as long as youtube and netflix works, nothing else matters right (sarcasm)

well and "the internet" right ? (that's "facebook")

> et ceterum censeo NAT delendam esse lmfao

> well and "the internet" right ? (that's "facebook") my lord, you and jonas should have a show ur killing me

> tom wrote: > why? > that'd seem like the exact opposite of what a VPN company would want to do That's sometimes just an option. Either by default or as troubleshooting. Also, many sites / registrars / hosting providers don't support ipv6. At least not without asking.