http://google.com/ works fine for me, tested in Firefox and with curl -6. So it could actually be your side that is broken, although it is probably your ISP’s.
My side works fine, Google just doesn’t like the address. It’s a tunnelbroker address, maybe they consider that bots… but only for some of their servers? It’s weird
Oh okay, IMO IPv6 tunnels are worse than just disabling it, because it’s basically just a proxy with IPv6, and since there’s no encryption (at this layer) both your ISP and now the tunnel could collect your data, as well as added latency.
But I guess it’s okay for experimentation or if you actually require IPv6 for something.
Hard disagree there. It is a tunnel, it is plenty fast if the intermediate node is close enough, and why would you want encryption at the IP layer.
It works great and gives me IPv6 that I otherwise wouldn’t have with my ISP (Optimum), allowing me to connect to native IPv6 site and use all the IPv6 functionality I want (dedicated IPs for containers/VMs etc).
http://google.com/works fine for me, tested in Firefox and withcurl -6. So it could actually be your side that is broken, although it is probably your ISP’s.My side works fine, Google just doesn’t like the address. It’s a tunnelbroker address, maybe they consider that bots… but only for some of their servers? It’s weird
Oh okay, IMO IPv6 tunnels are worse than just disabling it, because it’s basically just a proxy with IPv6, and since there’s no encryption (at this layer) both your ISP and now the tunnel could collect your data, as well as added latency.
But I guess it’s okay for experimentation or if you actually require IPv6 for something.
Hard disagree there. It is a tunnel, it is plenty fast if the intermediate node is close enough, and why would you want encryption at the IP layer.
It works great and gives me IPv6 that I otherwise wouldn’t have with my ISP (Optimum), allowing me to connect to native IPv6 site and use all the IPv6 functionality I want (dedicated IPs for containers/VMs etc).