XMPP Service Operators - 2025-03-19

IPv6 means less NATs, means better latency in general (as TURN may be unnecessary)

Maybe, but it could also mean more NATs and worse latency, I don't think you can just assume it'll be better

My IPv6 is routed through hurricane electric in California, for instance

okay, let me rephrase: native IPv6.

Even then it can take different routes, is that thing with cogent refusing to peer still a thing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogent_Communications#Peering_disputes ok looks like many more happened and are in various states of working, yikes

Cogent sounds about as likeable as DTAG, and I love that they actually sued DTAG.

It's kind of amazing the internet works at all

> Maybe, but it could also mean more NATs and worse latency, I don't think you can just assume it'll be better Ipv6 was created specifically to address the address shortage and return to every device having a unique publicly routable address ↺

Sure that was the theory, in practice though...

Not having to proxy your voice calls through a middle man means less latency, packet loss, jitter, and more reliability

> Not having to proxy your voice calls through a middle man means less latency, packet loss, jitter, and more reliability I'm feeling like a broken record repeating myself here... it *could* mean that but in practice it's not necessarily always true, IPv6 routes are different, and so *can* be better, but also *can* be worse ↺

> Not having to proxy your voice calls through a middle man means less latency, packet loss, jitter, and more reliability I'm feeling like a broken record repeating myself here... it *could* mean that but in practice it's not necessarily always true, IPv6 routes are different, and so *can* be better, but also *can* be worse ↺

Its mostly about reachability

And ipv6 routes are generally through newer non-legacy equipment

Ipv6 routing is only an issue in some parts of the country like Missouri where cogentco is the only backbone and there is little or no competition

All this is already long past beeing technical correct without merit.

> All this is already long past beeing technical correct without merit. 👍 ↺

> All this is already long past beeing technical correct without merit. No its a long standing deeply technical issue with the internet. Its a peering issue ↺

https://www.agwa.name/blog/post/working_around_the_he_cogent_ipv6_peering_dispute

If you have a lot of customers in a cogentco-only peering land you may need to consider this

Most of the ISPs in the western united states do open peering with HE, a tier 1 backbone network whereas most of the ISPs in the Midwest are hierarchical branches of cogentco circuits usually being sold to ISPs through a electric service coops

For some reason ISPs in the Midwest rarely peer with each other. Open internet exchanges are less common there.

https://www.nwax.net/

https://www.seattleix.net/

https://la-ix.com/

These three buildings are extremely critical in making the internet work well