-
Hello guys
last night we encountered a previsible problem
Some of us had Ip address v4 others had IP address V6.
-
IP V6 can’t host because UI doesn’t fit
-
mix between V4 and v6 seems to be smooth because we finally succeeded in flying together
Anyone having experience on this subject ?
-
-
Without ever having taken a glimpse at the F4 source code, I guess allowing ipv6 hosting shouldn’t be an issue as the underlying changes in the tcp stack should be transparent to nearly all applications handling tcp/ip in a sane manner. I’d also suggest allowing host DNS names) in the connect box (effectively turning it into a text field) so addresses are easier to remember.
All the best, Uwe
-
Any news here? Our providers here in Germany start to offer ipv6 with a provider nat for ipv4. So you are not able to host any public service unless using ipv6.
-
as long as the rest of the world is still using ip4 i think its no biggie to just use ipv4. For ipv4 to ipv6 conversion microsoft delivers the Teredo adapter
-
We haven’t done ANY testing on IPv6 whatsoever. Approach with extreme caution. No support for this yet so use at own risk and don’t worry about reporting issues for now. We are listening to try and figure out when it makes sense to have IPv6 support though…right now the perception is that not enough people have it to make it worth messing with…open to data that says otherwise.
-
The two major cable providers do not offer any ipv4 addresses for new customers. For ipv4 they use some nat at provider level. So hundreds of customers share the same ip. This means all customers of these providers can not host any falcon game. Furthermore all customers who upgrade or change their plan will be affected as well. In the longer run this will happen to existing customers as well.
-
We haven’t done ANY testing on IPv6 whatsoever. Approach with extreme caution. No support for this yet so use at own risk and don’t worry about reporting issues for now. We are listening to try and figure out when it makes sense to have IPv6 support though…right now the perception is that not enough people have it to make it worth messing with…open to data that says otherwise.
Ipv6 support will make all the port forwarding NAT issues go away,
I have native ipv6 (dual stack) - given that many ip registries have already run out of ipv4 you can expect ipv6 to be pushed hard in the next couple of years.
-
Ipv6 support will make all the port forwarding NAT issues go away,
I have native ipv6 (dual stack) - given that many ip registries have already run out of ipv4 you can expect ipv6 to be pushed hard in the next couple of years.
If IPv6 advocates had a nickel for every time some person said we’ll absolutely need it any second now… Lol…NATs are the big reason that the v4 address pool running out hasn’t pushed v6 over the top just yet… Given how darned ugly so many of the NAT implementations are that’s spectacularly ironic if you ask me. I’d love to see v4 long gone if it were up to me.
-
If IPv6 advocates had a nickel for every time some person said we’ll absolutely need it any second now… Lol…NATs are the big reason that the v4 address pool running out hasn’t pushed v6 over the top just yet… Given how darned ugly so many of the NAT implementations are that’s spectacularly ironic if you ask me. I’d love to see v4 long gone if it were up to me.
Well it is starting to happen.
China has the biggest need for ip, and they have the smallest ipv4 allocation. Apnic ran out a while back…
All their new networks are being built on ipv6.
And yes. Nat was a stopgap. It’s a horribly broken hack network administration wise and needs to die
-
Don’t see any problem. In any sensible socket API (BSD with getaddrinfo(3)/winsock), it’s enough to change the address family. Then it magically starts working.
-
Well it is starting to happen.
Indeed – even my local ISP is starting to hand out readiness for IPv6 tools.
And yes. Nat was a stopgap. It’s a horribly broken hack network administration wise and needs to die
“Amen hallelujah!” as the saying goes.
–
Cheers,Mark.
-
Therefore I am glad that IPV6 will last a few more years here before they start…
Also have switched it of at my system. Absolout no need at the moment. -
I checked if ports 2934-2937 are open with simple port tester from pcwintech.com, and I noticed random failure with ipv6 on, disabling the ipv6 gave success on open ports.
-
Never had any problems with IPv6 addresses assigned.
-
No need for a new thread, so i thought i reopen this one…
I’m now one of the lucky guys who is stuck with IPv6 because my ISP can’t give any IPv4 adress ranges away anymore. No more hosting possible for anybody who tries to connect with a IPv4 ISP. The only way to dodge the problem, is to host on a dedicatet Server which is connected to a IPv4 ISP.
The other way around, connecting to IPv4 is no problem, which is in some way a relief, but hosting directly from my machine is from now on a NOGO - except anybody has a go around?
-
Could you possibly use something like Hamachi to side-step this issue?
-
Finnish ISPs give automatically IPV6 now. However we most often can have the IPV4 as well - and I control my own NATs of course.
But it would indeed be very interesting to use DNS names (and IPV6 sites). -
@ ASharpe - Maybe, but not an option for a complete squad to go through the hassle seting up a VPN…
-
@ ASharpe - Maybe, but not an option for a complete squad to go through the hassle seting up a VPN…
They’ve actually made it ridiculously easy with individual download and connection links that send you right to the VPN that sent you the link.
-
Thanks ASharpe. It semms to be a work around and i will give it a try. But you know how it is with workarounds. It’s just another thing you have to keep an eye on, before you even get in the pit. I’m refering here also to newcomers who maybe struggle on the same thing and don’t know what maybe seems to be wrong. Of course, the problems are not based on falcon itself.
A solution within Falcon would be best, but right now it could be only mentioned on the wish list caugh caugh
