Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Bah! Who stole my interwebs?!
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Bah! Who stole my interwebs?!

KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep
edited August 2011 in General

Nvm. I'm to distracted to be posting online tonight I guess. :(

Comments

  • test

  • Wtf xd

  • freddyarenasfreddyarenas Member
    edited July 2015

    ...

  • what's going on? can someone fill me in? :(

  • What it these?

  • GM2015GM2015 Member

    The act of increasing our post increases our LowEndKarma.

    hostnoob said: what's going on? can someone fill me in? :(

  • PeroniPeroni Member

    Why is a post from 2011 being bumped now?

  • @Peroni said:
    Why is a post from 2011 being bumped now?

    oh I didn't notice that

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    So, four years later @KuJoe have you found your interwebs?

    Thanked by 3gestiondbi yomero Pwner
  • KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep
    edited July 2015

    @raindog308 said:
    So, four years later KuJoe have you found your interwebs?

    I have but unfortunately IPv4 is slow as hell (less than 5Mbps). IPv6 is going strong at 115Mbps though.

  • KuJoe said: I have but unfortunately IPv4 is slow as hell (less than 5Mbps). IPv6 is going strong at 115Mbps though.

    service ipv4 stop
  • KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep

    @Traffic said:

    I considered tunneling IPv4 over IPv6 but I'm only here for another 2 weeks and I have plenty of VPSs I can use to download stuff if needed (and then I can download from my home desktop over IPv6).

    Thanked by 1Traffic
  • Rob92Rob92 Member

    Wow o.o

  • KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep
    edited July 2015

    Looks like my interwebs is getting a little better now...

    Thanked by 1TriDoxiuM
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    KuJoe said: Looks like my interwebs is getting a little better now...

    I'll check this thread again in 2019 for an update.

  • TrafficTraffic Member
    edited July 2015

    raindog308 said: I'll check this thread again in 2019 for an update.


    @KuJoe said:
    Looks like my interwebs is getting a little better now...

  • KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep
    edited July 2015

    @Traffic I'd be happy with 20Mbps if I were paying for 20Mbps but I'm paying damn near $60/month for 100Mbps, I could cut my bill in half for 20Mbps.

  • @KuJoe - I think Comcast knows of your IPv6 habits, and is encouraging you to switch.

  • TrafficTraffic Member
    edited July 2015

    KuJoe said: @Traffic I'd be happy with 20Mbps if I were paying for 20Mbps but I'm paying damn near $90/month for 100Mbps, I could cut my bill in half for 20Mbps.

    $90 for internet? Here if you pay that you can get much better, and guaranteed (minimum) - usually you can get more BW than promised if you go with a good provider.

    Those prices are for landline phone+internet+streaming TV (on 120+) - you have to add 20% to the price though, but still cheaper...

  • PING interwebs.cgs (192.168.1.127) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from RPI.CGS (192.168.1.127): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.966 ms
    64 bytes from RPI.CGS (192.168.1.127): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.537 ms
    64 bytes from RPI.CGS (192.168.1.127): icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.512 ms
    64 bytes from RPI.CGS (192.168.1.127): icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.533 ms
    64 bytes from RPI.CGS (192.168.1.127): icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=0.540 ms
    64 bytes from RPI.CGS (192.168.1.127): icmp_req=6 ttl=64 time=0.540 ms
    ^C
    --- interwebs.cgs ping statistics ---
    6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5006ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.512/0.604/0.966/0.164 ms
    

    In 2019 it'll be all NAT but really fast.

  • TurnerTurner Member

    Is that actually a thing that ipv6 is faster?

  • KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep

    Traffic said: $90 for internet? Here if you pay that you can get much better, and guaranteed (minimum) - usually you can get more BW than promised if you go with a good provider.

    Exactly. :)

    Thanked by 1Traffic
  • NyrNyr Community Contributor, Veteran

    Traffic said: $90 for internet? Here if you pay that you can get much better, and guaranteed (minimum) - usually you can get more BW than promised if you go with a good provider.

    Not everywhere, plenty of places only have ADSL available. I only have a 3 mbps connection, for example.

  • Turner said: Is that actually a thing that ipv6 is faster?

    People keep arguing about this and there are edge cases where IPv6 supposedly handles things better. But why not check it out for yourself?

    --- ipv6.l.google.com ping6 statistics ---
    16 packets transmitted, 16 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 19.624/33.161/68.142/14.921 ms
    
    --- google.com ping statistics ---
    15 packets transmitted, 15 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 158.082/176.905/207.376/15.866 ms
    

    I'd say yes.

  • Nyr said: Not everywhere, plenty of places only have ADSL available. I only have a 3 mbps connection, for example.

    Very true - these kind of things happen even in the big cities here. In one street you can choose what you want, and in the next one only ADSL is available.

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider

    IPv6 seems faster as it's usually handled by newer routers. Newer routers usually have more capacity and so they aren't as congested, resulting in a faster speeds. Not related to the protocol itself, just the way of deploying it.

  • TrafficTraffic Member
    edited July 2015

    @Clouvider said:
    IPv6 seems faster as it's usually handled by newer routers. Newer routers usually have more capacity and so they aren't as congested, resulting in a faster speeds. Not related to the protocol itself, just the way of deploying it.

    These IPv6 flux capacitors really do make Internet faster.

  • KuJoeKuJoe Member, Host Rep

    IPv6 is faster for me because of the routing. Comcast does not route IPv6 within their network so a normal traceroute from my house looks like this:

    My Desktop -> My Router -> Comcast -> Level3

    If I do a traceroute to one of my servers in Florida from here in Colorado it takes at least 5 less hops over IPv6 than IPv4 to the same server.

  • KuJoe said: IPv6 is faster for me because of the routing.

    I'm guessing that would be the reason in most cases. After full IPv6 implementation I doubt we'll see the same dramatic ratio - although there may be a few edge cases where there is a slight difference.

    Thanked by 1Clouvider
This discussion has been closed.