From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.zx2c4.com (lists.zx2c4.com [165.227.139.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07046C5B543 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2025 12:07:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id 16adc46b; Thu, 5 Jun 2025 12:05:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nt.romanrm.net (nt.romanrm.net [2a0b:8bc0:1:1cd::1]) by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id fca490ab (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2025 12:05:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nvm (umi.2.romanrm.net [IPv6:fd39:a37d:999f:7e35:7900:fcd:12a3:6181]) by nt.romanrm.net (Postfix) with SMTP id D205240EA4; Thu, 5 Jun 2025 12:04:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 17:04:59 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: Andre Tann Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com Subject: Re: Delay in ipv6 Message-ID: <20250605170459.43439532@nvm> In-Reply-To: <7e977585-5b93-4591-94f7-bf33c8923543@alphasrv.net> References: <7e977585-5b93-4591-94f7-bf33c8923543@alphasrv.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 16:53:33 +0200 Andre Tann wrote: > Hi all, > > I hope this is not offtopic here. If so, pls let me know a better place > for this question. > > I configured wireguard to route both IPv4 and IPv6. Both protocols work > fine. But test-ipv6.com only gives 9/10 points because the browser does > not use IPV6 even though it is available. > > Then I investigated a bit and found this: > > ping -4 dns.google => ping sequence starts immediately > ping -6 dns.google => .5 secs delay => ping sequence starts > ping -6 dns.google => ping sequence starts immediately > > i.e.: On the first try, ping6 takes longer, but the second time there is > no delay anymore. Hello, Which DNS resolvers do you use? Try 8.8.8.8 or 1.1.1.1 at first, and then their v6 equivalents. > I suspected DNS trouble, but pinging 2001:4860:4860::8844 shows the > exact same behavior: delay the first time, no delay next time. This might be caused by DNS again, trying to resolve PTR record for the IP. Recheck if "ping -n" starts in this case without a delay. -- With respect, Roman