“Signal is being blocked in Venezuela and Russia. The app is a popular choice for encrypted messaging and people trying to avoid government censorship, and the blocks appear to be part of a crackdown on internal dissent in both countries…”

  • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21 month ago

    Peer to peer apps do not work without a centralized relay to get you around the CG-Nat that cellphones live behind. So they’re not really peer to peer. You would be playing whack-a-mole with the relays, having to spin them up as they get blocked. Many ISPs implement CG-NAT as well. Its really dependent on how the network providers structure things. Someone from the country with local knowledge would have to test it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 month ago

      IPv6 doesn’t need CGNAT. So as long as it’s capable of doing IPv6, it can directly communicate peer to peer using globally unique addresses. How do I know this? Simple because my ISP on IPv4 is completely CGNAT and I cannot get anything past it. So I am completely forced to use IPv6 for any service I want to run and access from outside my network.

      • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 month ago

        Sure, but ipv6 is not widely adopted. I’m behind a CG-NAT but can’t get an ipv6 so I have to operate a vps bridge to host my services. Some cell networks have ipv6 support but a few implement a NAT for it as well. AT&T only allows port 80 and 443.

        Its not consistent enough to be useful without a centralized relay.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 month ago

          I think that really depends on where you are. Here in the US, for example, IPv6 is pretty darn well adopted. And even 45% of Google’s internet traffic is done over IPv6.

          • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 month ago

            Sure but if your looking to use a chat service, 45% is not a high enough watermark to have reliability. Its so contingent on the network operator to allow for an IPV6 connection. And like I said, places like AT&T have a NAT on their IPV6 network.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 month ago

              True, the only other option is something like simplex through tor. There are also p2p options like meshtastic as well.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 month ago

      IPv6 doesn’t need CGnet. So as long as it’s capable of doing IPv6, it can directly communicate peer to peer using globally unique addresses. How do I know this? Simple because my ISP on IPv4 is completely CG NAT and I cannot get anything past it. So I am completely forced to use IPv6 for any service I want to run and access from outside my network.