Why must our internet infrastructure be so fucked.
Just ran into my first issue with CGNAT last night when my Minecraft server stopped being contactable after my ISP moved me from a publicly routable IP to one behind CGNAT. I feel you wholeheartedly, imo if I want to host something, there shouldnβt be any higher barrier to entry than a simple port forward.
You may want to check your telcos agreement on that.
As far as the Telcos are concerned, we all need to happy little consumers of media.
We arenβt allowed to generate and publish any media of our own.
The Governments agree with them.
Yeah once I figured out what happened I did check the agreement and saw that I was completely at their whim with no recourse (MATE internet if anyone is curious). So at this point Iβm shopping around ISPs that allow for a static routable IP, if anyone has any recommendations then let me know. Looking for 250/25 or better when it comes to speed
While I donβt have an official static IP with iiNet NBN, I donβt remember the last time it changed. Itβs been at least 18 months on the same IP. They also allow you to open up remote access ports on your link (they block all the common ports by default) via their toolbox interface.
You might be able to manually enable IPv6 in Optusβ APN.
My Telstra eSIM didnβt automatically enable IPv6, when my physical SIM did, but enabling it in the telstra.wap APN fixed it.
Optus ipv6 is still next to non-existent from what I recall, even on home NBN networks. Even TPG/Vodafone are starting to roll it out, although it hasnβt reached the MVNOs like Kogan yet.
EDIT: They might be finally rolling out ipv6 on their network going by this whirlpool thread
Satellite and Mobile are both pretty bad options for hosting.
Have you looked at tailscale or CloudFlare zerotrust to allow access to your server?
Well I donβt want my server hardware somewhere I donβt control (kinda half the point of self hosting). That leaves me with the choice of ADSL or starlink (one is multiple orders of magnitude faster with multiple order of magnitude lower ping). I use mobile on my phone to access my services when Iβm not at home.
Tailscale is basically just a VPN but it requires an ipv4 introduction point.
wut? My IP is hella cucked behind cgnat and I use tailscale with no worries
So ur using a public tailscale introduction point. I donβt like the idea of that but I guess I might have to.
Starlink isnβt our infrastructure.
Genuine question:
What does ipv6 give you that ipv4 does not? I genuinely canβt tell the difference as an Internet browser. Particularly on the phone.
For me, itβs an additional, redundant layer 3 route between my dual stack nodes. Iβve had instances where v4 or v6 paths have broken, and Iβve not noticed until my monitoring systems explicitly notify me.
Iβd also like more tools to use MPTCP which would make them more resilient.
What does ipv6 give you that ipv4 does not?
A public, directly routable IP address which doesnβt cost a fortune for the ISPs. In fact, an incomprehensible number of public, directly routable IPs per user such that itβs an embarrassment of riches compared to ipv4 (the only important limitations are more down to the number of subnets per user, which is usually still way more than you need at 256 for /56 prefixes).
And itβs even better if all devices and networks support it, since you no longer have to rely on n layers of NAT, reducing latency and complexity.
I self host. Cgnat means my servers ipv4 is not globally accessible hence Iβm using ipv6. ipv6 does also reduce network congestion and improve routing efficiency.
The fact that it improves routing efficiently and that Optus does not support it explains all you need to know about Optus.
All the noise that happened recently with the 3G shutdown tells us just how many old phones there out there on the cell networks. Running old iOS/Android versions with a gazillion exploits. I think itβs a good thing that telcos NAT their customers. The last thing we want is for the Internet to be able to easily connect to those devices.
ipv6 does also reduce network congestion and improve routing efficiency.
Unless you are moving gigabits of data, you wonβt notice the difference the smaller header payload of ipv6 offers. Thatβs some serious ePenis bragging bullshit I see all the time among nerds who want to say theyβre on the latest and fastest technology without understanding that while they are correct (uploading/downloading a gigabyte over ipv6 will probably complete a few seconds faster over ipv6 instead of ipv4), theyβre also making a big deal about nothing.
Your issue is you want to be able to access your home network over mobile infrastructure, while you are paying for a basic phone plan. Optus does offer what you want, but to business customers. Telstra will also permit you to apply a static IP to some of their plans, I managed to do this for a client about 10 years ago. It was just an add-on that Telstra offered. They were on a business plan, but I donβt remember whether a business plan was a requirement.
I think itβs a good thing that telcos NAT their customers. The last thing we want is for the Internet to be able to easily connect to those devices.
Thatβs the job of a firewall, not a NAT.
That a NAT also blocks connections is incidental, itβs blocking them because it just has no idea how to handle them.
The second one of these old phones connects to almost any WiFi network they have an ipv6 (if their device supports it which old vulnerable ones wonβt). And nat should not be performing the job of a firewall.
Iβm less concerned about the ipv6 throughput gain and more concerned about the fact I get an order of magnitude better ping on ipv6.
U misunderstand my issue. I donβt want ipv6 for a broadband connection. I have home internet via starlink which has ipv6 and cgnat ipv4. Hence my server is only accessible over ipv6. My phone is on a optus network meaning that when I am not on ipv6 WiFi I cannot access my server.
Unless you are moving gigabits of data, you wonβt notice the difference the smaller header payload of ipv6 offers.
IPv6 headers are usually bigger anyway1, so the only advantage is more efficient routing (so infinitesimally better latency), but in my experience most routers only support IPv4 hw offload and not IPv6, so itβs only more efficient in theory.
I just like IPv6 because I get a whole /56 prefix to play with, and devices often randomise their host portion through the privacy extensions, meaning they use a new address each day or so.
1 IPv4 is usually ~20 bytes, but it can be up to 60 bytes if you stack a lot of options, IPv6 is only 40 bytes AFAIK.
