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

    Unbound ipv6 problems anyone?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved 2.4 Development Snapshots
    63 Posts 6 Posters 14.6k 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.
    • B
      bimmerdriver
      last edited by

      @marjohn56:

      It would appear that something is odd with your system Bimmer, otherwise Chris and Ned over here would be suffering also, and they are not having any issues.

      Here is some further info that makes me wonder why dhcp6c and unbound messages start to appear in the log around the same time during the reboot. Not clear what is happening during the "Configuring WAN interface…done." phase, but it's a few steps before unbound is started, yet dhcp6c is only barely into the startup phase by the time unbound is starting.

      ![pfsense console.PNG](/public/imported_attachments/1/pfsense console.PNG)
      ![pfsense console.PNG_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/pfsense console.PNG_thumb)

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • B
        bimmerdriver
        last edited by

        And here are a few more log messages from general:

        Aug 4 09:19:22	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: Removing static route for monitor fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001 and adding a new route through fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001%hn1
Aug 4 09:19:22	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: ROUTING: setting IPv6 default route to fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001%hn1
Aug 4 09:19:22	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: ROUTING: setting default route to 154.20.116.1
Aug 4 09:19:22	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: rc.newwanipv6: on (IP address: fe80::215:5dff:fe5c:e21d%hn1) (interface: wan) (real interface: hn1).
Aug 4 09:19:22	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: rc.newwanipv6: Info: starting on hn1.
Aug 4 09:19:21	rtsold		Received RA specifying route fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001 for interface wan(hn1)
Aug 4 09:19:17	kernel		done.
Aug 4 09:19:16	php-cgi		rc.bootup: ROUTING: setting default route to 154.20.116.1
Aug 4 09:19:16	kernel		.done.
Aug 4 09:19:15	kernel		pflog0: promiscuous mode enabled
Aug 4 09:19:15	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Resyncing OpenVPN instances.
Aug 4 09:19:15	kernel		hn0: link state changed to UP
Aug 4 09:19:15	check_reload_status		Linkup starting hn0
Aug 4 09:19:15	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Starting dhcp6 client for interface wan hn1 in DHCP6 without RA mode

        The first unbound log message appeared at 09:19:17.

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

          scrapped my post as you already said its defaults, I would follow the advice given and compare ipv6 settings.

          pfSense CE 2.7.2

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • B
            bimmerdriver
            last edited by

            I'm using the same ipv6 settings that I've been using for months which are correct for my ISP. The only variable is whether or not to send a prefix hint and that makes no difference. Without the other settings are they are, the PD process will not complete.

            I had thought this was a new problem since the other recent changes to unbound, but I restarted my 2.3.4 system and noticed it does the same thing. As I said before, I think this slipped through the cracks before because unbound used to restart so often on its own. However, when I rebooted my 2.3.4 system, I checked nslookup google.com immediately after booting and it failed. After restarting unbound, it worked.

            Unless someone has another explanation, this problem appears to be caused by unbound starting before the PD process is complete.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B
              bimmerdriver
              last edited by

              I did a couple more packet captures with wireshark, two reboots from the 2.3.4 system and two from the 2.4 beta system.

              The 2.3.4 system took 2.34 seconds and 1.36 seconds. The 2.4 beta system took 4.84 seconds both times.

              Both systems have identical WAN ipv6 settings. It's interesting to notice that pfsense 2.3.4 appears to send the RS after sending the second dhcp request before the reply is received, rather than apparently waiting for the reply as pfsense 2.4 beta does. I have never noticed this behaviour before. It could be a coincidence.

              You can see that the link-local address of the edge router is the same in both cases, so any difference is from pfsense, not the edge router.

              2.3.4.PNG
              2.3.4.PNG_thumb
              ![2.4 B.PNG](/public/imported_attachments/1/2.4 B.PNG)
              ![2.4 B.PNG_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/2.4 B.PNG_thumb)

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • ?
                Guest
                last edited by

                When I get some time to play I'll put something together for you. Don't know when that will be as real work is exceptionally busy at the moment.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • ?
                  Guest
                  last edited by

                  I've issued a PR for this.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • B
                    bimmerdriver
                    last edited by

                    I installed the PR and I'm happy to confirm that it works perfectly.

                    So you can see it in action, here are some log messages:

                    Aug 11 10:23:32	php-cgi		rc.bootup: sync unbound done.
Aug 11 10:23:31	php-cgi		rc.bootup: dhcp6 init complete. Continuing
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: Removing static route for monitor fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001 and adding a new route through fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001%hn1
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: ROUTING: setting IPv6 default route to fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001%hn1
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: ROUTING: setting default route to *.*.116.1
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: rc.newwanipv6: on (IP address: fe80::215:5dff:fe5c:e21d%hn1) (interface: wan) (real interface: hn1).
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanipv6: rc.newwanipv6: Info: starting on hn1.
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:29	rtsold		Received RA specifying route fe80::ea4:2ff:fe29:5001 for interface wan(hn1)
Aug 11 10:23:29	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:28	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:27	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:33	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:32	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:31	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Unbound start waiting on dhcp6c.
Aug 11 10:23:31	php-cgi		rc.bootup: ROUTING: setting default route to 154.20.116.1
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Resyncing OpenVPN instances.
Aug 11 10:23:30	kernel		hn0: link state changed to UP
Aug 11 10:23:30	check_reload_status		Linkup starting hn0
Aug 11 10:23:30	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Starting dhcp6 client for interface wan hn1 in DHCP6 without RA mode
Aug 11 10:23:28	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanip: rc.newwanip: on (IP address: *.*.118.8) (interface: WAN[wan]) (real interface: hn1).
Aug 11 10:23:28	php-fpm	291	/rc.newwanip: rc.newwanip: Info: starting on hn1.
Aug 11 10:23:27	php-cgi		rc.bootup: Accept router advertisements on interface hn1
Aug 11 10:23:27	php-cgi		rc.bootup: calling interface_dhcpv6_configure.
Aug 11 10:23:27	check_reload_status		rc.newwanip starting hn1

                    Thank you very much for fixing this problem.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • ?
                      Guest
                      last edited by

                      Apart from the weird time stamps.  8)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • B
                        bimmerdriver
                        last edited by

                        @marjohn56:

                        Apart from the weird time stamps.  8)

                        I never noticed that. I guess that's a bug in the log.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • ?
                          Guest
                          last edited by

                          @marjohn56:

                          Apart from the weird time stamps.  8)

                          You've cracked time travel as well  :-)

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

                            Just to be sure I did test this and seems to not break anything on uk sky connections.  So good from my end.

                            pfSense CE 2.7.2

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • w0wW
                              w0w
                              last edited by

                              bimmerdriver, is it possible that you have trouble with hardware clock?  ???

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • B
                                bimmerdriver
                                last edited by

                                @nivek1612:

                                @marjohn56:

                                Apart from the weird time stamps.  8)

                                You've cracked time travel as well  :-)

                                I rebooted and took another look at the logs. I guess the time travel was a once-only event. Strange.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • w0wW
                                  w0w
                                  last edited by

                                  Maybe NTP daemon syncs sometimes in the same time unbound starts?

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • ?
                                    Guest
                                    last edited by

                                    I think the time traveller idea is more fun. 8)

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