[lacnog] [v6ops] Windows CLAT Enters Private Preview: A Milestone for IPv6 Adoption | Microsoft Community Hub
jordi.palet en consulintel.es
jordi.palet en consulintel.es
Dom Nov 23 15:29:34 -03 2025
Y cada vez mas frecuentemente CGN (ida y vuelta).
Saludos,
Jordi
@jordipalet
> El 23 nov 2025, a las 16:51, Alejandro Acosta <alejandroacostaalamo en gmail.com> escribió:
>
> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> LACNOG mailing list
> LACNOG en lacnic.net
> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
> Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
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.
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/attachments/20251123/466260d0/attachment-0001.htm>
Más información sobre la lista de distribución LACNOG