DHCPv6 running but not assigning addresses
-
The service starts at all times.. the issue is its not doing its function.. its not handing out IPv6 addresses.
I gave it over night rest and even after several reboots.. no go.
-
Are you sure you're using a client that actually does DHCPv6? (e.g. Windows, BSD, Linux, Mac) and not a client that does not do DHCPv6 (Android, iOS, many others)?
If the service is running there should be other entries in the DHCP log that show what clients are trying to do. You may have a different problem than the OP in this thread so a new thread may be best.
-
Yes, I have 3 Macs and 4 Windows (7 & 8) clients. I have configured IPv6 on pfSense many times before with no such issues. In fact my iPhone would recognize and pickup IPv6 address as well.
If you like I can open a new thread on this but I posted here as I saw the other members having the exact same issue with a snapshot of around 27. Mine is the latest 1/28.
Planning to do a full clean install again and see if it helps. Honestly, I don't think it will make much of a difference as I did a pretty clean install yesterday with no packages on it.. just simple straight IPv6 configuration. The gateways are online and no problems there.. just the IPv6 DHCP failing to hand IP addresses.
-
I split your post off. The OP in the old thread couldn't get the service started and was getting addresses from autoconf. Your service does start, different problem. The other guy who posted in the thread may or may not have been related. Still, yours seems unique.
We'll need to see all of the settings you have on the DHCPv6 and Router Advertisements tabs next, and the DHCP log.
-
Cool thanks.
RA -
Router Advertisements: Managed (tried Assisted.. didn't help)
Router Priority: Normal (tried High too)DNS: didn't touch
โ------------------
DHCPv6 -
DHCPv6 Server: enable checked
Range: 2001:470:xxxx:1:10:0:1:11ย toย 2001:470:xxxx:1:10:0:1:11Rest all untouched
-
OK, Managed is what you want there for DHCPv6 only. If you want DHCPv6+Autoconf, you can use Assisted. Either one should work for DHCPv6 clients.
The only difference I see in your config is that I have a static mapping setup for my workstation and I also have prefix delegation setup so that my pfSense VMs behind my edge router can get IPv6 from DHCP (and that is all working, too). I only have one LAN interface though.
-
What about the log?
And is that range really the same IP at the start and end?
Not that it should matter, but mine goes from ::FF00 to ::FFFF.
-
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Sending on Socket/10/em1/2001:470:xxxx:1::/64
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Listening on Socket/10/em1/2001:470:xxxx:1::/64
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Sending on Socket/10/em2/2001:470:xxxx:2::/64
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Listening on Socket/10/em2/2001:470:xxxx:2::/64I first tried this on just one interface (subnet).. it didn't work so I tried with the second. I have 5 interfaces servicing 5 different subnets.
I don't have stating mapping till now (only in DHCPv4). Also, I do not need a prefix delegation setup as my pfSense is on the forefront of my entire network.
-
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Sending on Socket/10/em1/2001:470:xxxx:1::/64
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Listening on Socket/10/em1/2001:470:xxxx:1::/64
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Sending on Socket/10/em2/2001:470:xxxx:2::/64
Jan 29 11:40:44 dhcpd: Listening on Socket/10/em2/2001:470:xxxx:2::/64And that's it? That would suggest it's not receiving any requests. Check your firewall log, make sure it's not blocking DHCP requests. It may help to see /tmp/rules.debug and the contents of the filter.log.
I don't have stating mapping till now (only in DHCPv4). Also, I do not need a prefix delegation setup as my pfSense is on the forefront of my entire network.
That should be fine, it's not required, just noting the differences.
-
Jan 29 12:21:08 dhcpd: DHCPACK on 10.0.1.11 to 50:55:ba:f1:47:41 via em1
Jan 29 12:21:08 dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 10.0.1.11 from 50:55:ba:f1:47:41 via em1I dont see IPv6 requests. Only IPv4 in the logs.
-
Did clean install with today's snapshot 1/29. Seems to be working fine now. Not sure what was the problem with 1/28 snapshot.