Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    IPv6 seems to be working fine, but…

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.1 Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED
    13 Posts 5 Posters 3.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • rcfaR
      rcfa
      last edited by

      Well, I spend some time today to turn all the computers on the LAN into dual-stack devices.
      The quite useful http://test-ipv6.com/ gives me now 10/10, so things seem to be working just fine.

      What doesn't work is DHCPv6, likely due to the radvd bug, which means I have to disable it for DHCPv6 to even start, but even so I couldn't get any of my devices to acquire a IPv6 address automatically; hence I proceeded to assign them one manually. The huge IPv6 address space invites to be wasteful, I noticed.
      So since unfortunately we can't use dotted-quad IPv4 notation to replace two sixteen bit sections of an IPv6 address, and since my "convert to hex in the head" ability is a tad limited, I ended up just converting the last four 16-bit sections of the IPv6 address to take up what I have in my IPv4 address. So 123.45.67.89 turned into something like 2001:0:cafe:babe:123:45:67:89 (Talk about wasteful use of address space!) It would be much nicer if one could use addresses like 2001:0:cafe:babe:0:0:123.45.67.89 or 2001:0:cafe:babe:0:0:123.45:67.89
      Anyway, not a problem in the near term for my LAN ;)

      Now to the questions:

      a) given two default routes, one for IPv4 and one for IPv6, which is the preferred one, i.e. on an IPv6 enabled net, who/what decides if a dual-stack remote location is accessed over IPv6 or IPv4?
      b) does it matter in any way if I list IPv6 or IPv4 DNS servers first?
      c) why is only 127.0.0.1 and not ::1 listed as DNS server? Does it even matter?

      Basically, my IPv6 link should be faster for just about any purpose that matters, particularly browsing the web, but e.g. posting here still shows my IPv4 address as the one that makes the submission, which means IPv4 is preferred (assuming you run the site with a dual-stack setup)

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cmb
        last edited by

        @rcfa:

        a) given two default routes, one for IPv4 and one for IPv6, which is the preferred one, i.e. on an IPv6 enabled net, who/what decides if a dual-stack remote location is accessed over IPv6 or IPv4?
        b) does it matter in any way if I list IPv6 or IPv4 DNS servers first?
        c) why is only 127.0.0.1 and not ::1 listed as DNS server? Does it even matter?

        a) gateways - v6 if you're accessing off-net v6, v4 if you're accessing off-net v4. Your OS determines whether it prefers AAAAs or As. Basically every current OS prefers AAAAs by default, but has a means of reverting that behavior (sysctl on *nix, probably registry on Windows but not sure offhand)
        b) no
        c) doesn't matter and no need for both

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • D
          databeestje
          last edited by

          Current OS 10.7 has a weird form of "happy-eyeballs" where it will always pick the fastest transport, which effectively makes 10.7 a IPv4 only device unless the v6 latency is better.

          There was a "agreed upon" 30ms grace but Apple has deemed it harmful and thus removed it. This is a recent development though. I assume this only applies to Safari for the moment.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • I
            iFloris
            last edited by

            Under 10.7 I have found that chrome also respects the 'which route is the fastest' method, as well as things like the finder and even transmit.

            one layer of information
            removed

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • D
              dhatz
              last edited by

              Sorry to hijack this thread, but I just happened to notice some comments in freebsd-net mailing list, about issues (panics) when using mpd5 with IPv6

              More: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2012-June/032624.html

              On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 01:33:05PM +0200, Przemyslaw Frasunek wrote:
              P> unfortunately, one of my mpd5 PPPoE access servers started panicing every few
              P> hours.
              P>
              P> I'm running recent 8.3-STABLE (as of 23th May) with WITNESS, INVARIANTS and
              P> DEBUG_MEMGUARD compiled. Unfortunately, I'm unable to catch crashdump. For some
              P> reason, it is not saved on dumpdev.
              P>
              P> The only thing I have is panic string:
              P>
              P> Fatal trap 9: general protection fault while in kernel mode
              P> cpuid = 2; apic id = 02
              P> instruction pointer      = 0x20:0xffffffff804b4e2d
              P> stack pointer            = 0x28:0xffffff8185386560
              P> frame pointer            = 0x28:0xffffff81853865d0
              P> code segment            = base 0x0, limit 0xfffff, type 0x1b
              P> = DPL 0, pres 1, long 1, def32 0, gran 1
              P> processor eflags = interrupt enabled, resume, IOPL = 0
              P> current process          = 2832 (mpd5)
              P> trap number              = 9
              P>
              P> According to "objdump -d", the fault address points to prelist_remove().
              P>
              P> I tried to replace all of hardware, but it still panics in the same way. I would
              P> be really grateful for any hints.
              P>
              P> dmesg output: http://www.frasunek.com/tmp/dmesg.txt
              P> kernel config: http://www.frasunek.com/tmp/kernel.txt

              I suspect this isn't related to netgraph, but to IPv6 since prelist_remove()
              is found in netinet6/nd6_rtr.c.

              Several times I looked into ND code and found lots of race prone code there.
              May be some was recently fixed by bz@, but definitely not merged to stable/8.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • D
                databeestje
                last edited by

                There have been a bunch of general fixes in 8.3 and 8.1 trees with regard to IPv6. It could possibly be already fixed in the snapshots.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • D
                  dhatz
                  last edited by

                  Seth, it's not fixed yet, according to yesterday's post by bz

                  Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net
                  Sat Jun 16 19:22:11 UTC 2012

                  On 15. Jun 2012, at 21:57 , Przemyslaw Frasunek wrote:

                  I suspect this isn't related to netgraph, but to IPv6 since prelist_remove()
                  is found in netinet6/nd6_rtr.c.

                  Several times I looked into ND code and found lots of race prone code there.
                  May be some was recently fixed by bz@, but definitely not merged to stable/8.

                  Thanks a lot guys. For now, I disabled IPv6 on this BRAS. Let's see if it's
                  going to help.

                  It will, as there are no fixes in the tree yet for this issue.

                  /bz

                  –
                  Bjoern A. Zeeb

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • rcfaR
                    rcfa
                    last edited by

                    @databeestje:

                    Current OS 10.7 has a weird form of "happy-eyeballs" where it will always pick the fastest transport, which effectively makes 10.7 a IPv4 only device unless the v6 latency is better.

                    I'm running (cough) 10.8 (cough), I mean, 10.7, I couldn't run anything that's not released yet, right? ;)

                    Anyway, http://test-ipv6.com/ shouldn't be affected by that, because it uses both dual-stack, IPv4-only and IPv6-only test sites. So only in the dual-stack cases the "use the lowest latency" policy would matter, because the lowest latency to an IPv6-only site could be near infinite, and it would still be the fastest link.

                    Before my CF card died, I got 10/10 points for both IPv4 and IPv6 going to http://test-ipv6.com/ but now I get 0/10 even though all I did was install the then latest snapshot and restore the previously saved config. Various upgrades and gitsyncs since haven't changed the situation. I'm fairly clueless where to look by now, because I have a floating rule in the firewall to pass just about any protocol from anything to anything on any interface, both IPv4 and IPv6, because I never got to the point of writing the real firewall rules (currently mostly relying on the built-in firewall on all my hosts…)

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • D
                      databeestje
                      last edited by

                      Sure, but dual stack is what pretty much everyone will want to do.

                      Not sure on the test-ipv6.com score, can't replicate that.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • rcfaR
                        rcfa
                        last edited by

                        @databeestje:

                        Sure, but dual stack is what pretty much everyone will want to do.

                        Not sure on the test-ipv6.com score, can't replicate that.

                        I understand. Personally, I don't care too much which is used, however I need to figure out why IPv6 broke.
                        I can use it from one machine in the LAN to another, I can use it from the pfSense box to the internet, but I can't use it from the LAN through the pfSense box, even though it's supposed to be wide open.  ???

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • D
                          databeestje
                          last edited by

                          Check if radvd is actually working, it should be on the routing tab of the system logs.

                          Without radvd you won't have a v6 address, nor a default route on your LAN. Check the settings and apply. The page has changed somewhat too. DHCPv6/RA

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • rcfaR
                            rcfa
                            last edited by

                            @databeestje:

                            Check if radvd is actually working, it should be on the routing tab of the system logs.

                            Without radvd you won't have a v6 address, nor a default route on your LAN. Check the settings and apply. The page has changed somewhat too. DHCPv6/RA

                            Does that apply even if the clients are manually assigned a router and IPv6 address?
                            I would think that manual assignment should be sufficient…

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • D
                              databeestje
                              last edited by

                              Sure, manual assignments are perfectly fine.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.