On 2011-Jun-01 13:18, Tim Chown wrote: > > On 31 May 2011, at 22:31, Voll, Toivo wrote: > >> >> Netalyzr (http://n3.netalyzr.icsi.berkeley.edu/analysis) finds no >> issues with my IPv6 status, but alerts me to the fact (since >> confirmed by switching to IE) that Google Chrome defaults to IPv4 >> rather than IPv6, and consequently a lot of the testing tools claim >> that my IPv6 is broken. > > I'm a little confused there - the current Chrome prefers IPv6, and > also now includes code to allow fast failover to IPv4 in the event > IPv6 connectivity is down/slow (300ms headstart). > > I had some issues with Netalyzer detecting my dual-stack status, > which the chaps there are helping with.
Netalyzer is Java-based, thus it uses the Java stack and not the Javascript/ECMAScript stack that Chrome provides. As such it just bypasses all of that and the coolest thing is that you might not even have an IPv6-capable Java stack for your host. The 1.6.0_25-b06 Oracle/Sun version on Windows that I have here seems to do IPv6 just fine btw in combination with Netalyzr. Apparently in my home case I have a slow DNS lookup (odd, never had issues with that, maybe it has to do with me having to click 'accept' on the windows firewall UI ;) 8<----------------------------------------------- It takes 239 ms for your computer to fetch a response from our test server using IPv6, while it takes 7289 ms for the same host to fetch a response using IPv4 from the same server. ----------------------------------------------->8 Definitely has to do with clicking 'ok' on the firewall button ;) Greets, Jeroen
