Re:Going IPv6 Only
by Karrot_Kream on Saturday February 19, 2022 @09:08PM
(#30402579)
CGNAT is a menace to any low latency connection since now your route needs to jump through some NATed hops that may be under varying amounts of load depending on how large the translation tables are. Things get worse if connectivity has to be established by some middlebox as you have no idea how many hops it takes to go to the middlebox and you have no guarantee how loaded this box is. Using a public TURN server can be terrible for VoIP call latency.
Some online games try avoid p2p because it can expose the players to other gamer in the session, who can then try DoS their IP as a competitive advantage.
Places that require calls to be recorded securely will need non p2p still.
And privacy conscious users are screwed either approach (p2p/centralised) if they want to hide their IP.
Not being natted doesn't mean you have to talk to others directly - just that you can. And yeah, once you have people who want to cheat in some ways, you'll need the centralised oversight / validation for the service either way.
If you ever made a call online your latency has been impacted because we can't reliably establish connections between end users and have to proxy the calls through the (hopefully close) DC. The services are also more expensive for you, because they have to account for that traffic.
This impacts you whether you are behind a NAT or not.
If you are behind CGNAT, you're going to get more captchas and likely get occasionally ratelimited, because someone is bound to misbehave, or the aggregate of that traffic from a small IP range will look like an attack at some point.