[lacnog] [v6ops] Windows CLAT Enters Private Preview: A Milestone for IPv6 Adoption | Microsoft Community Hub

Alejandro Acosta alejandroacostaalamo en gmail.com
Dom Nov 23 12:51:24 -03 2025


Hola Fer,

   Si, pero recuerda también puede haber NAT64/NAT46 en el otro extremo.


Ale,


On 23/11/25 11:45 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> Hola, Henri,
>
> Hay otra cuestion: Para asegurarse de la causa, el delay extra deberia 
> medirse en los primeros hops (donde se supone que existe la diferencia 
> causada por el NAT). SI lo medis e2e, hay pueden existir otra cantidad 
> de factores.
>
> Slds,
> Fernando
>
>
>
>
> On 22/11/25 11:01, Henri Alves de Godoy vía LACNOG wrote:
>>
>> Para quem quiser testar o realizar os testes em suas residências, o 
>> arquivo curl-format.txt deve ter o conteúdo:
>>
>> time_namelookup:  %{time_namelookup}
>> time_connect:     %{time_connect}
>> time_appconnect:  %{time_appconnect}
>> time_pretransfer: %{time_pretransfer}
>> time_starttransfer:%{time_starttransfer}
>> time_total:       %{time_total}
>> size_download:    %{size_download}
>> speed_download:   %{speed_download}
>>
>> Att,
>> Henri.
>>
>> Em sáb., 22 de nov. de 2025 às 10:15, jordi.palet--- vía LACNOG 
>> <lacnog en lacnic.net <mailto:lacnog en lacnic.net>> escreveu:
>>
>>     Gracias Henri,
>>
>>     Solo me queda la duda de si la diferencia puede ser por la WiFi. Yo
>>     nunca hago pruebas de este tipo con Wifi, siempre con Ethernet,
>>     porque puede haber variaciones/interferencias en la radio incluso
>>     con pocos segundos de diferencia.
>>
>>     Eso si, discrepo contigo en que los usuarios no lo notan … te
>>     aseguro que si, esa es la pelea de los operadores todos los días,
>>     especialmente con los gammers!
>>
>>     Saludos,
>>     Jordi
>>
>>     @jordipalet
>>
>>
>>>     El 22 nov 2025, a las 14:00, Henri Alves de Godoy
>>>     <henri.godoy en fca.unicamp.br <mailto:henri.godoy en fca.unicamp.br>>
>>>     escribió:
>>>
>>>     Bom dia Jordi, Fernando e Alejandro,
>>>
>>>     Aproveitando essa manhã de Sábado ensolarado, realizei um pequeno
>>>     teste básico a partir de minha residência, link Internet 600Mbps -
>>>     Operadora Claro, Notebook Windows 11, utilizando Wi-Fi,
>>>     dual-stack, IPv4 CGNAT.  IPv6 global.
>>>
>>>     Como destino está o website da Faculdade de Ciências Aplicadas -
>>>     UNICAMP - Dual Stack - Apache Server.
>>>
>>>     Comando:
>>>
>>>     curl -4 -L --resolve www.fca.unicamp.br:443:143.106.230.5 `
>>>       -o NUL -s -w "@curl-format.txt"
>>>     https://www.fca.unicamp.br/test/10m.bin
>>>     <https://www.fca.unicamp.br/test/10m.bin>
>>>
>>>     curl -6 -L --resolve www.fca.unicamp.br:443:2801:8a:c040:fca0::5 `
>>>       -o NUL -s -w "@curl-format.txt"
>>>     https://www.fca.unicamp.br/test/10m.bin
>>>     <https://www.fca.unicamp.br/test/10m.bin>
>>>
>>>     Parâmetros analisados:
>>>
>>>     |time_connect|: handshake TCP
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         |time_appconnect|: handshake TLS (só em HTTPS)
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         |time_starttransfer| (TTFB): tempo até o primeiro byte
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         |time_total|: tempo total do download
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         |speed_download|: throughput final
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         Resultados:
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         IPv4
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         time_connect:     0.032 s
>>>         time_appconnect:  0.643 s
>>>         time_starttransfer:0.675 s
>>>         time_total:       5.923 s
>>>         speed_download:   1.77 MB/s
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         IPv6
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         time_connect:     0.043 s  (quase igual ao IPv4)
>>>         time_appconnect:  0.101 s  (mais rapido)
>>>         time_starttransfer:0.155 s  (mais rápido)
>>>         time_total:       2.14 s   (mais rápido)
>>>         speed_download:   4.89 MB/s
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>         Analise:
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>             TLS handshake (time_appconnect):
>>>
>>>
>>>         IPv4 é 6,3 vezes mais lento no handshake
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>             IPv6: 0.101 s
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>             IPv4: 0.643 s
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         Tempo total (time_total):
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         IPv4: 5.92 s
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         IPv6: 2.14 s
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>           Throughput final
>>>
>>>         IPv6 está entregando 2,8 vezes mais throughput.
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>           IPv6: 4.89 MB/s
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>           IPv4: 1.77 MB/s
>>>
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         É claro que é um teste único e seria interessante realizar uma
>>>         média de várias conexões.
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         Os usuários conseguem então ter um experiência melhor de
>>>         navegação ao consumir o website da Faculdade utilizando IPv6
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         Para um usuário normal e leigo, isso pode passar despercebido,
>>>         pois o objetivo é acessar o website. Para nós profissionais,
>>>         temos a certeza de que estamos proporcionando um acesso com
>>>         uma experiência melhor para os nossos alunos e visitantes.
>>>      *
>>>
>>>      *
>>>         Abraços !
>>>         Henri.
>>>      *
>>>
>>>
>>>     Em sáb., 22 de nov. de 2025 às 07:07, jordi.palet--- vía LACNOG
>>>     <lacnog en lacnic.net <mailto:lacnog en lacnic.net>> escreveu:
>>>
>>>         Hola Henri, Fernando,
>>>
>>>         Creo que hablamos de diferentes mediciones … se trata de
>>>         comparar IPv6 nativo extremo a extremo (por ejemplo
>>>         residencial con IPv6-only y Facebook) con usuario residencial
>>>         que, en el mismo operador y con los mismos dispositivo (para
>>>         que sea comparable), tenga solo IPv4 y accede al mismo 
>>> contenido.
>>>
>>>         He encontrado un paper, que quizás “contente" a Fernando,
>>>         seguramente hay muchos otros (yo recuerdo haber leído otros de
>>>         Akamai, Facebook y T-Mobile, pero ahora mismo no doy con ellos:
>>>
>>>         https://www.moritzsteiner.de/papers/Mobicom_IPv6.pdf
>>> <https://www.moritzsteiner.de/papers/Mobicom_IPv6.pdf>
>>>
>>>         Lo he leído solo por encima, y no me queda claro si son las
>>>         mismas pruebas que yo he hecho, parece que al menos son
>>>         cercanas y comparables, solo que en red mobil. En este caso
>>>         compara casos de diferentes operadores y muestra diferencias
>>>         importantes entre ellos (por eso yo hago estas pruebas en mis
>>>         despliegues, para asegurar que es óptimo). Por ejemplo en el
>>>         caso de Verizon (el mejor de todos), incluso supera ese 40%
>>>         que yo indicaba y copio textualmente:
>>>
>>>         In Figure 7(b), we observe similar reductions in PLTs for
>>>         pages loaded by Verizon’s IPv6 clients over Verizon’s IPv6
>>>         network. Specifically, we show that the median and 80% of the
>>>         PLTs by IPv6 clients over Verizon’s IPv6 network are 48% and
>>>         64% faster than PLTs over its IPv4 network, because of the
>>>         significant differences in RTTs between Verizon’s IPv6 and
>>>         IPv4 networks as shown in Figure 4(b).
>>>
>>>         Nota: PLT es Page Load Time, que creo que es equivalente a lo
>>>         que yo indicaba de “time to complete http get”.
>>>
>>>         Hay otras partes del documento que por ejemplo indican mejoras
>>>         en T-Mobile (red "pura” IPv6-only) del RTT entre el 49 y el 
>>> 64%.
>>>
>>>         El documento tiene muchas otras referencias, quizás algunas
>>>         sean de mediciones similares.
>>>
>>>         Saludos,
>>>         Jordi
>>>
>>>         @jordipalet
>>>
>>>
>>>>         El 21 nov 2025, a las 22:53, Henri Alves de Godoy vía LACNOG
>>>>         <lacnog en lacnic.net <mailto:lacnog en lacnic.net>> escribió:
>>>>
>>>>         Hola Fernando y Jordi,
>>>>
>>>>         En LACNIC 34 ,  realizei um teste simples, realizando as
>>>>         traduções via 464XLAT utilizando o Jool, apresentaram
>>>>         pouquíssima variação de desempenho. Talvez isso ocorra porque
>>>>         o mecanismo de transição opera diretamente no kernel Linux,
>>>>         garantindo latências muito próximas entre IPv4 e IPv6, mesmo
>>>>         sob carga.
>>>>
>>>>         Por curiosidade, realizarei outros em breve para comparar os
>>>>         cenários atualmente.
>>>>
>>>>         Segue anexo.
>>>>
>>>>         Abraços !
>>>>         Henri.
>>>>
>>>>         Em sex., 21 de nov. de 2025 às 17:09, Fernando Gont
>>>>         <fgont en si6networks.com <mailto:fgont en si6networks.com>> 
>>>> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>>             Hola, Jordi,
>>>>
>>>>             On 21/11/2025 15:52, jordi.palet--- vía LACNOG wrote:
>>>>             > Hola Fernando,
>>>>             >
>>>>             > A mi FB nunca me dijo que tuviera dudas, y ademas
>>>>             Akamai y otros
>>>>             > hicieron las mismas mediciones y coincidían, y yo
>>>>             también lo he
>>>>             > comprobado en despliegues de clientes.
>>>>
>>>>             Repito: Cuales son las referencias a las publicaciones?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             > Digo yo que tanta coincidencia,
>>>>             > por algo será, además de la lógica de tener o no
>>>>             multiples traducciones
>>>>             > que sabemos que son latencia adicional.
>>>>
>>>>             Estamos hablando en serio?
>>>>
>>>>             Se supone que si uno va a tirar datos, se tiene que
>>>>             entender, al menos
>>>>             por arriba, las condiciones y limitaciones del
>>>>             experimento, y en
>>>>             principio un analisis (con sustancia) que permita
>>>>             entender los
>>>>             resultados obtenidos.
>>>>
>>>>             Respecto de las traducciones, alguien cuantifico la
>>>>             latencia, de forma
>>>>             mas o menos seria?
>>>>
>>>>             --             Fernando Gont
>>>>             SI6 Networks
>>>>             e-mail: fgont en si6networks.com 
>>>> <mailto:fgont en si6networks.com>
>>>>             PGP Fingerprint: F242 FF0E A804 AF81 EB10 2F07 7CA1 321D
>>>>             663B B494
>>>>
>>>>             _______________________________________________
>>>>             LACNOG mailing list
>>>>             LACNOG en lacnic.net <mailto:LACNOG en lacnic.net>
>>>>             https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>>>> <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog>
>>>>             Cancelar suscripcion:
>>>>             https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>>>> <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         --
>>>> <Screenshot_2.png>_______________________________________________
>>>>         LACNOG mailing list
>>>>         LACNOG en lacnic.net <mailto:LACNOG en lacnic.net>
>>>>         https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>>>> <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog>
>>>>         Cancelar suscripcion:
>>>>         https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>>>> <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog>
>>>
>>>
>>>         **********************************************
>>>         IPv4 is over
>>>         Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>>>         http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com/>
>>>         The IPv6 Company
>>>
>>>         This electronic message contains information which may be
>>>         privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be
>>>         for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and
>>>         further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying,
>>>         distribution or use of the contents of this information, even
>>>         if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited
>>>         and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
>>>         intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
>>>         distribution or use of the contents of this information, even
>>>         if partially, including attached files, is strictly
>>>         prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must
>>>         reply to the original sender to inform about this
>>>         communication and delete it.
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         LACNOG mailing list
>>>         LACNOG en lacnic.net <mailto:LACNOG en lacnic.net>
>>>         https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>>> <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog>
>>>         Cancelar suscripcion:
>>>         https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>>>         <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     --
>>
>>
>>     **********************************************
>>     IPv4 is over
>>     Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>>     http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com>
>>     The IPv6 Company
>>
>>     This electronic message contains information which may be privileged
>>     or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive
>>     use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
>>     authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents
>>     of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is
>>     strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If
>>     you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
>>     copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information,
>>     even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited,
>>     will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
>>     original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     LACNOG mailing list
>>     LACNOG en lacnic.net <mailto:LACNOG en lacnic.net>
>>     https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>>     <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog>
>>     Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>>     <https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LACNOG mailing list
>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>


Más información sobre la lista de distribución LACNOG