IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN
-
I had to read this a bunch of times, but I think I understand what you're saying. Where I'm confused:
-
Is it your assumption that the prefix delegation is or isn't getting assigned, and that that delegation is or isn't translating over to the other two LANs with "track interface" specified?
-
What logs can I monitor to see if the prefix is successfully being assigned by the service provider? Because dhcp6c isn't showing that level of detail.
-
Why do the NAT reciprocating rules affect the IPv6 delegation? Technically IPv6 doesn't do NAT. Are you saying it's because the prefix negotiation is happening over v4?
-
How is an improper local firewall route making my ipv6 gateway fail and remain listed as "pending"? The gateway should auto-populate, as it isn't its own interface - it merely tracks the outbound routes that RA says are available after the dhcp6c handshake (Doesn't it? Or is it "built" upon WAN addressing with it's own link local address as a next-hop for LAN routes traversing the interfaces?).
And I'm going to have to do some mental math to figure out how to adapt this for my multi-wan box, because I don't have the luxury of using "v4+v6" rules thanks to my internet setup. They have to be separate gateways.
-
-
That's what I was looking for earlier. I'll post a log here. The prefix delegation is being assigned. That much of it works as intended. I use a /63 which gave me two /64's to use. I guess Cox will only allow this much without asking for more...and that is enough for me anyways.
IPv6 doesn't need to use NAT so yes you are correct. The localhost addresses need to know where to go within the machine (127.0.0.0/8, fe80::/64), especially the fe80::/64 localhost. Here is a pic of my WAN setup with a /63.
Where the Gateway is "Pending"; that is ok. It depends on how you configure it. When one gateway goes down, the other will come online. As long as it states that it's Online or Pending is good. You can select the option to disable gateway monitoring and then it will change the status to Online.
@jsnl said in IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN:
Doesn't it? Or is it "built" upon WAN addressing with it's own link local address as a next-hop for LAN routes traversing the interfaces
This is where I discovered the problem and you nailed it. When I changed the NAT options to Manual, I was able to edit each of those Automatic rules to see how it was being applied to the gateway firewall. That's where I discovered that the LAN routes were applied to translate to the WAN address, which is not how Source NAT works. I was confused there, so I erased them all and made those masquerading rules.
You should be able to use the Internal Address for the LAN as intended. That example is my WAN in the pictures above. I chose to use the Subnet just to see if the firewall was blocking more.
If you have delegated IP's on your client machines, then you are 99.999 percent there. :) This drove me to insanity last night. :) Again, I will post the logs. If there is a particular log you would like to see, just let me know.
Just work your way through it by tackling one net at a time. I even rebooted the machine just to see if it went back down or had something else irregular go wrong. It's been running all day without any issues so far. The answer to your question at the end of the second bullet is the one log I'm searching for as well.
-
This log is from /var/log/dhcpd.log
Oct 26 23:16:32 pfSense dhcpd: Sending on BPF/bce0/00:10:18:4d:6a:d4/192.168.3.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:32 pfSense dhcpd: Listening on BPF/em0/b4:b5:2f:b9:19:68/192.168.2.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:32 pfSense dhcpd: Sending on BPF/em0/b4:b5:2f:b9:19:68/192.168.2.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:32 pfSense dhcpd: Sending on Socket/fallback/fallback-net
Oct 26 23:16:32 pfSense dhcpd: Server starting service.
Oct 26 23:16:33 pfSense dhcp6c[85204]: Sending Solicit
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Server 4.3.6-P1
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Copyright 2004-2018 Internet Systems Consortium.
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: All rights reserved.
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: For info, please visit https://www.isc.org/software/dhcp/
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Config file: /etc/dhcpd.conf
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Database file: /var/db/dhcpd.leases
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: PID file: /var/run/dhcpd.pid
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Server 4.3.6-P1
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Copyright 2004-2018 Internet Systems Consortium.
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: All rights reserved.
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: For info, please visit https://www.isc.org/software/dhcp/
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Wrote 21 leases to leases file.
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Listening on BPF/bce0/00:10:18:4d:6a:d4/192.168.3.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Sending on BPF/bce0/00:10:18:4d:6a:d4/192.168.3.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Listening on BPF/em0/b4:b5:2f:b9:19:68/192.168.2.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Sending on BPF/em0/b4:b5:2f:b9:19:68/192.168.2.0/28
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Sending on Socket/fallback/fallback-net
Oct 26 23:16:36 pfSense dhcpd: Server starting service.
Oct 26 23:16:37 pfSense dhcp6c[85204]: Sending Solicit
Oct 26 23:16:45 pfSense dhcp6c[85204]: Sending Solicit
Oct 26 23:17:02 pfSense dhcp6c[85204]: Sending Solicit
Oct 26 23:17:10 pfSense dhcpd: reuse_lease: lease age 2156 (secs) under 25% threshold, reply with unaltered, existing lease for 192.168.2.11
Oct 26 23:17:10 pfSense dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 192.168.2.11 from a4:31:35:85:58:0d (P32) via em0
Oct 26 23:17:10 pfSense dhcpd: DHCPACK on 192.168.2.11 to a4:31:35:85:58:0d (P32) via em0
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: PREINIT
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient[5075]: DHCPREQUEST on re0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient[5075]: DHCPACK from 192.168.0.1
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: REBOOT
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: Starting add_new_address()
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: ifconfig re0 inet 192.168.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.240 broadcast 192.168.0.15
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: New IP Address (re0): 192.168.0.3
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: New Subnet Mask (re0): 255.255.255.240
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: New Broadcast Address (re0): 192.168.0.15
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: New Routers (re0): 192.168.0.1
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: Adding new routes to interface: re0
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient: Creating resolv.conf
Oct 26 23:18:13 pfSense dhclient[5075]: bound to 192.168.0.3 -- renewal in 1800 seconds.
Oct 26 23:18:15 pfSense dhcp6c[16460]: failed to open /usr/local/etc/dhcp6cctlkey: No such file or directory
Oct 26 23:18:15 pfSense dhcp6c[16460]: failed initialize control message authentication
Oct 26 23:18:15 pfSense dhcp6c[16460]: skip opening control port
Oct 26 23:18:16 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: Sending Solicit
Oct 26 23:18:17 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: Sending Request
Oct 26 23:18:18 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: dhcp6c Received REQUEST
Oct 26 23:18:18 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: add an address 2600:8803:7800:e93e:b6b5:2fff:feb9:1968/63 on em0
Oct 26 23:18:18 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: status code for PD-0: success
Oct 26 23:18:18 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: add an address 2600:8803:7800:e930:a149:8b16:189d:3b30/128 on re0
Oct 26 23:18:18 pfSense dhcp6c[17093]: status code for NA-0: success
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: PREINIT
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient[17087]: DHCPREQUEST on bce1 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient[17087]: DHCPACK from 192.168.0.1
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: REBOOT
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: Starting add_new_address()
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: ifconfig bce1 inet 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.240 broadcast 192.168.0.15
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: New IP Address (bce1): 192.168.0.2
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: New Subnet Mask (bce1): 255.255.255.240
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: New Broadcast Address (bce1): 192.168.0.15
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: New Routers (bce1): 192.168.0.1
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: Adding new routes to interface: bce1
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient: Creating resolv.conf
Oct 26 23:18:19 pfSense dhclient[17087]: bound to 192.168.0.2 -- renewal in 1800 seconds. -
This is a snapshot of my NDP table:
The interface IPV6NET has no network attached.
-
So I don't think my issue is the same. I made all of the routing changes you stated, and I have a WAN IP again, but still no addresses propagating to my LAN or PUBLIC_LAN. I also still don't have a functional IPv6 gateway (IPv6 is not multi-wan, only one service provides IPv6). I made a LAN route of 192.168.201.0/23 (LAN is x.x.201.x, VPN is x.x.202.x), a PUBLIC route of 192.168.244.0/24, and the two WAN routes plus Manual Outbound Routing.
Screenshots attached.
-
Yes, I knew your issue was very different with MultiWAN. I wanted to show that assigning with the prefix and the settings I used works just to start some troubleshooting.
I see....your Link Local is showing pending. If you have a WAN IP, it should be a /128. I would check the Interfaces of the main page. I had to manually add that WAN IP address in the Routing section. Sometimes it auto-populates.
Are you using 5 networks? I read that you have a /60, but has not been verified yet. That gives you a prefix ID from 0-f, but f is a new network. If COMCAST has not allowed that subnet for use, then that may be why the modems DHCPv6 is not issuing the /128 address to your WAN, however....
I see that you need at least 5 networks, so a /60 means 16 /64 networks. Using a /60 means you are on a new network. Your local WAN may not be able to see that address or entire network, but you can see the Link-Local only (fe80::), of the localhost, but that's a good thing.
I would try /62, which would allow you a total of 7 nets or Net ID's (Prefix ID's) to use (0-7) just to troubleshoot. A /61 would give you 15 Prefix ID's.
You should see both an IP on your WAN and a different IP for your LAN's/Additional Interfaces. Then you can add the LAN/VPN's Interface IPv6 Subnet to the RA. It will be different from the WAN.
-
So I requested a /62, and adjusted the prefixes for the two LANs to "1" and "3". Got the same /128 on the WAN, none of the other interfaces have IPv6 IPs, and the gateway now lists as "down" instead of "pending".
I did see this in my firewall log though. I have a feeling this is part of my problem. DF69 is the newly generated gateway address.
Oct 27 23:28:56 WAN [fe80::$:$:$:ff82]:547 [2603:$:$:$:$:$:$:df69]:13626 UDP Default deny rule IPv6 (1000000105)
-
So you set it to /60 and the gateway was Online (required config)
You set it to /62 and the gateway is showing Offline (troubleshooting)In this case, /60 is working just fine then and your WAN received the /128 address. The Gateway is Online. The Link-Local is present. Your LAN's are not receiving anything.
Areas to check:
- I'll assume that your NAT is set to Automatic? Your setup may be different here.
- I'll assume that you have a default IPv6 rule on all local interfaces allowing IPv6.
- I'll assume that you cannot determine the RA yet for the Local Interfaces until you receive the delegated IP addresses.
- What does your LAN RA look like in the DHCPv6 settings?
- With a /60, you can ping ipv6.google.com, so everything is working.
@jsnl said in IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN:
2603:$:$:0:208:y:y:df69 and a link local of fe80::208:y:y:df69 (the Y's match)
:208 Should match on all Interfaces and not necessarily the Y's. Let's say the Gateway has :2080. The LAN will have :2081, The VLAN will have :2084 and so on (different Prefix ID's)Correction. I was up late.....yes you are right. Both the WAN and Link-Local will match, which means that PFsense is working.
This is where I had the headache and again turned my attention to NAT after observing the firewall traffic.
The next step is to get the local interfaces their IP addresses and then verify that they are all /64 for advertisement to the clients. Inspect the firewall for sure.
-
There is no consistency between /60, /61, /62 as to when the gateway is up, down, or pending. It's pretty random, and often a reboot with no configuration change will fix it.
Just so you have a status update... I'm still in manual nat, and I've added local routes and NAT rules and can now see the fe80:: packet pass my firewall rule. I had to add an fe80::/10 pass rule on my WAN, which feels odd... but I made it for only the two UDP ports to narrow it up. However I still don't have a functioning address on any other interface. So I'm guessing that 1) The script that runs to add/update the gateway isn't functioning properly or completing fully, and 2) the communication that happens between the prefix getting assigned and that delegation getting announced to the RA isn't happening - because the RADVD logs complain about "invalid ::0 routes" and other odd things.
I won't be able to deep dive into this for most of the week... but if you have a good troubleshooting method for me to figure out where along the chain the communication is failing (or which part of the WAN update shell scripts is failing) I'm all ears.
I'll get back to you as soon as I get time between projects. Thanks for your help.
-
No worries and glad I could help. That definitely sounds like a script issue there. I'll have to inquire about more or find a similar issue. I'm using version 2.4.4 I know that this issue exists with 2.4.3 where the track interface did not assign or advertise correctly.
https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/8429
This was one bug that's listed; IPv6 didn't work properly when using a LAN bridge. I had major issues with that version and upgraded.
-
Ok, so I have some more time to poke around. I'm still noticing some of the same things... gateway goes up and down on WAN and LAN configuration randomly, is always fixed by a reboot, and isn't directly affected by any particular setting. I tried setting a MTU of 1500 (as referenced in another thread re: the arpresolve errors), that didn't help. I notice now in the logs that the WAN RA is assigning the gateway correctly (which is the cable modem link local address)... but I'm seeing a lot of errors and still can't get any of the LANs to grab addresses.
For the purposes of these logs... "lagg0.201" is LAN, "lagg0.244" is PUBLIC_LAN.
Nov 1 17:52:06 firewall kernel: cannot forward src fe80:$::$:$:$:b668, dst 2001:4860:4806:4::, nxt 17, rcvif lagg0.201, outif igb1 Nov 1 17:55:02 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: rc.newwanipv6: Info: starting on igb1. Nov 1 17:55:02 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: rc.newwanipv6: on (IP address: 2603:$:$:$:$:$:$:df69) (interface: wan) (real interface: igb1). Nov 1 17:55:04 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:04 firewall dhcpleases: Could not deliver signal HUP to process because its pidfile (/var/run/unbound.pid) does not exist, No such process. Nov 1 17:55:05 firewall check_reload_status: Syncing firewall Nov 1 17:55:09 firewall kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 50.$.$.58 on igb1 Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 50.$.$.58 on igb1 Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 50.$.$.58 on igb1 Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 50.$.$.58 on igb1 Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall kernel: arpresolve: can't allocate llinfo for 50.$.$.58 on igb1 Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: calling interface_dhcpv6_configure. Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Accept router advertisements on interface igb1 Nov 1 17:55:10 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Starting rtsold process Nov 1 17:55:12 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Gateway, switch to: ComcastGW Nov 1 17:55:12 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Default gateway setting Comcast Upstream Gateway as default. Nov 1 17:55:12 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting ipsec tunnels Nov 1 17:55:12 firewall rtsold: Received RA specifying route fe80::$:$:$:df69 for interface wan(igb1) Nov 1 17:55:12 firewall rtsold: Starting dhcp6 client for interface wan(igb1) Nov 1 17:55:12 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:13 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:13 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:13 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:15 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:15 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:15 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:16 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:16 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:16 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:16 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: The command '/usr/local/sbin/unbound -c /var/unbound/unbound.conf' returned exit code '1', the output was '[1541109316] unbound[93148:0] error: bind: address already in use [1541109316] unbound[93148:0] fatal error: could not open ports' Nov 1 17:55:16 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:17 firewall check_reload_status: updating dyndns wan Nov 1 17:55:17 firewall kernel: lagg0.201: promiscuous mode disabled Nov 1 17:55:17 firewall kernel: vlan0: changing name to 'lagg0.201' Nov 1 17:55:19 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Removing static route for monitor 75.75.75.75 and adding a new route through 50.$.$.58 Nov 1 17:55:19 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Removing static route for monitor 2607:f8b0:4000:812::200e and adding a new route through fe80::$:$:$:df69%igb1 Nov 1 17:55:19 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Removing static route for monitor 64.233.217.2 and adding a new route through 24.$.$.1 Nov 1 17:55:19 firewall php-fpm: /rc.dyndns.update: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:20 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:20 firewall dhcpleases: Could not deliver signal HUP to process because its pidfile (/var/run/unbound.pid) does not exist, No such process. Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall rc.gateway_alarm[36097]: >>> Gateway alarm: WAN_DHCP6 (Addr:2607:f8b0:4000:812::200e Alarm:1 RTT:0.000ms RTTsd:0.000ms Loss:100%) Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall php-fpm: /rc.newwanipv6: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall check_reload_status: updating dyndns WAN_DHCP6 Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting ipsec tunnels Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting OpenVPN tunnels/interfaces Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall check_reload_status: Reloading filter Nov 1 17:55:23 firewall check_reload_status: Reloading filter Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall php-fpm: /rc.openvpn: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall php-fpm: /rc.dyndns.update: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall php-fpm: /rc.openvpn: OpenVPN: One or more OpenVPN tunnel endpoints may have changed its IP. Reloading endpoints that may use WAN_DHCP6. Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall php-fpm: /rc.filter_configure_sync: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:24 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:25 firewall php-fpm: /rc.filter_configure_sync: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:25 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:25 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:25 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting ipsec tunnels Nov 1 17:55:27 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:27 firewall dhcpleases: Could not deliver signal HUP to process because its pidfile (/var/run/unbound.pid) does not exist, No such process. Nov 1 17:55:28 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:29 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:29 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:31 firewall check_reload_status: updating dyndns lan Nov 1 17:55:31 firewall kernel: igb0: promiscuous mode disabled Nov 1 17:55:31 firewall kernel: igb2: promiscuous mode disabled Nov 1 17:55:31 firewall kernel: lagg0: promiscuous mode disabled Nov 1 17:55:31 firewall kernel: lagg0.244: promiscuous mode disabled Nov 1 17:55:31 firewall kernel: vlan1: changing name to 'lagg0.244' Nov 1 17:55:32 firewall php-fpm: /rc.dyndns.update: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:33 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:33 firewall dhcpleases: Could not deliver signal HUP to process because its pidfile (/var/run/unbound.pid) does not exist, No such process. Nov 1 17:55:34 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:34 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:34 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:35 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:35 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting ipsec tunnels Nov 1 17:55:38 firewall dhcpleases: /etc/hosts changed size from original! Nov 1 17:55:38 firewall dhcpleases: Could not deliver signal HUP to process because its pidfile (/var/run/unbound.pid) does not exist, No such process. Nov 1 17:55:39 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:40 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:40 firewall dhcpleases: kqueue error: unkown Nov 1 17:55:42 firewall check_reload_status: updating dyndns opt1 Nov 1 17:55:43 firewall php-fpm: /rc.dyndns.update: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:44 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Removing static route for monitor 75.75.75.75 and adding a new route through 50.$.$.58 Nov 1 17:55:44 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Removing static route for monitor 2607:f8b0:4000:812::200e and adding a new route through fe80::$:$:$:df69%igb1 Nov 1 17:55:44 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Removing static route for monitor 64.233.217.2 and adding a new route through 24.$.$.1 Nov 1 17:55:44 firewall check_reload_status: Reloading filter Nov 1 17:55:44 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /interfaces.php: Creating rrd update script Nov 1 17:55:44 firewall firewall.gardencitymi.org nginx: 2018/11/01 17:55:44 [crit] 58340#100233: *5436 SSL_write() failed (SSL:) (13: Permission denied) while processing HTTP/2 connection, client: 192.168.202.2, server: 0.0.0.0:443 Nov 1 17:55:48 firewall php-fpm: /rc.filter_configure_sync: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:48 firewall rc.gateway_alarm[11005]: >>> Gateway alarm: WAN_DHCP6 (Addr:2607:f8b0:4000:812::200e Alarm:1 RTT:0.000ms RTTsd:0.000ms Loss:100%) Nov 1 17:55:48 firewall check_reload_status: updating dyndns WAN_DHCP6 Nov 1 17:55:48 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting ipsec tunnels Nov 1 17:55:48 firewall check_reload_status: Restarting OpenVPN tunnels/interfaces Nov 1 17:55:48 firewall check_reload_status: Reloading filter Nov 1 17:55:49 firewall php-fpm: /rc.openvpn: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:49 firewall php-fpm: /rc.openvpn: OpenVPN: One or more OpenVPN tunnel endpoints may have changed its IP. Reloading endpoints that may use WAN_DHCP6. Nov 1 17:55:49 firewall php-fpm: /rc.dyndns.update: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members. Nov 1 17:55:49 firewall php-fpm[20847]: /rc.filter_configure_sync: Keep current gateway, its already part of the group members.
Now I also noticed this while doing a radvdump:
# # radvd configuration generated by radvdump 2.17 # based on Router Advertisement from fe80::1:1 # received by interface lagg0.201 # interface lagg0.201 { AdvSendAdvert on; # Note: {Min,Max}RtrAdvInterval cannot be obtained with radvdump AdvManagedFlag off; AdvOtherConfigFlag on; AdvReachableTime 0; AdvRetransTimer 0; AdvCurHopLimit 64; AdvDefaultLifetime 30; AdvHomeAgentFlag off; AdvDefaultPreference medium; AdvLinkMTU 1500; AdvSourceLLAddress on; DNSSL $.org { AdvDNSSLLifetime 10; }; # End of DNSSL definition }; # End of interface definition # # radvd configuration generated by radvdump 2.17 # based on Router Advertisement from fe80::1:1 # received by interface lagg0.244 # interface lagg0.244 { AdvSendAdvert on; # Note: {Min,Max}RtrAdvInterval cannot be obtained with radvdump AdvManagedFlag off; AdvOtherConfigFlag on; AdvReachableTime 0; AdvRetransTimer 0; AdvCurHopLimit 64; AdvDefaultLifetime 30; AdvHomeAgentFlag off; AdvDefaultPreference medium; AdvLinkMTU 1500; AdvSourceLLAddress on; DNSSL $.org { AdvDNSSLLifetime 10; }; # End of DNSSL definition }; # End of interface definition # # radvd configuration generated by radvdump 2.17 # based on Router Advertisement from fe80::$:$:$:df69 # received by interface igb1 # interface igb1 { AdvSendAdvert on; # Note: {Min,Max}RtrAdvInterval cannot be obtained with radvdump AdvManagedFlag off; AdvOtherConfigFlag off; AdvReachableTime 0; AdvRetransTimer 0; AdvCurHopLimit 64; AdvDefaultLifetime 60; AdvHomeAgentFlag off; AdvDefaultPreference high; AdvLinkMTU 1500; AdvSourceLLAddress on; prefix 2603:$:$::/64 { AdvValidLifetime 86400; AdvPreferredLifetime 14400; AdvOnLink on; AdvAutonomous on; AdvRouterAddr on; }; # End of prefix definition route ::/0 { AdvRoutePreference high; AdvRouteLifetime 60; }; # End of route definition RDNSS 2001:4860:4860::8888 2001:4860:4860::8844 2001:558:feed::1 { AdvRDNSSLifetime 20; }; # End of RDNSS definition DNSSL $.org { AdvDNSSLLifetime 20; }; # End of DNSSL definition }; # End of interface definition
...Is that telling me that I'm only getting a /64 with my /60 request on igb1?? Just as an experiment I changed LAN to prefix 0, but still got no LAN address. I read some other posts about adding static routes to make things work... but since I don't have fixed ipv6 addresses, that seems like a bad idea. I figure if I do that, I might as well do static addressing everywhere - and the first time I lose my leases, everything will go to hell.
Thoughts?
-
@jsnl said in IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN:
2607:f8b0
Yes. You should have a 16 /64 networks. The WAN IP should be a /64, which is what I see in both snapshots. It appears that your WAN DHCP6 is a 2607 address? It looks as if it should monitor the 2603 address from Comcast's WAN. That's what I see so far.
-
@smitheo1 said in IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN:
It appears that your WAN DHCP6 is a 2607 address?
No, that's just the IP that it pings every 2 seconds to see if the gateway is up or not. That 2607:f8b0:4003:c00::6a address is ipv6.google.com - the address I'm pinging to make sure I actually have ipv6 connectivity to the world and not just locally with Comcast. Once I get everything up and running I might change it to something locally on Comcast's domain, but for now I want to make sure I can see the internet in IPv6.
Is there any log I can see to know if the actual /60 prefix exchange is successful? Can I sniff it on the firewall in any way? Or do I have to wireshark it with an external laptop?
-
Ok. I'm tracking.
Yes. You can see the exchange with Wireshark from the client side. You should also be able to sniff the firewall as well. The firewall has the Packet Capture in the Diagnostics section. That's how I learned that something was not passing through.
-
Try taking a look around in /etc/defaults/rc.conf which is where the addresses are stored to see if something is active.
-
Sorry it's been a long time, but....what I have done was not use Track Interface. The LAN needs a (non routable IPv6) Static address. Make one up..... 2000:1000:AEAE:3000::1/64 for example. Check and verify if the WAN gateway in the Routing section is using a link-local address from the router. If so, add the Global IPv6 address to the Routing on the WAN interface and disable the link-local IPv6 address. The link-local one is not routable.
If you set the WAN to /56 or whatever, then it's fine. Track Interface takes a routable IPv6 address and assigns it to the LAN, which is not how it's supposed to work, because that is a private network.
-
@smitheo1 said in IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN:
Sorry it's been a long time, but....what I have done was not use Track Interface. The LAN needs a (non routable IPv6) Static address. Make one up..... 2000:1000:AEAE:3000::1/64 for example. Check and verify if the WAN gateway in the Routing section is using a link-local address from the router. If so, add the Global IPv6 address to the Routing on the WAN interface and disable the link-local IPv6 address. The link-local one is not routable.
If you set the WAN to /56 or whatever, then it's fine. Track Interface takes a routable IPv6 address and assigns it to the LAN, which is not how it's supposed to work, because that is a private network.
There appears to be a lot of nonsense in your post. For example, why would you assign a non routeable address to the LAN? Also, the one you used is routeable. It's just not yours. Global Unique Addresses start with 2 or 3. Also, disabling the link local address will break a lot of things such as neighbour and router discovery & advertisements and more. And link local addresses are often used for routing in IPv6. Also, what the heck do you mean by "Track Interface takes a routable IPv6 address and assigns it to the LAN, which is not how it's supposed to work, because that is a private network."? Also, WAN addresses are often /128. In an earlier post you say it should be a /64 and another, /128. Incidentally, that /128 plays no roll in routing to the network. It is simply an address used to access the firewall/router. -
@JKnott You use the Global Gateway's delegated network. Track Interface uses the Global Gateway's network to assign a delegated IPv6 address to the LAN.....bad idea. That's why a ton of people are having problems. What's being routed is the delegated network via the /64. 2000:: is a Global network, but the gateway modem's Global network should not overlap with the LAN because it's routable to the Internet.
The firewall/router automatically assigns the link local as the WAN gateway.....it's not routeable dude. IT GOES NOWHERE!!!!! Add the correct Global WAN IPv6 Gateway manually when that happens and turn off the link local. The firewall already knows what that is.
Furthermore, the NAT is blocking all IPv6 by default, so I made the proper NAT.
You obviously don't know how to provide a solution, because I am fully operational with IPv6. It's not nonsense to a certified engineer.
-
@smitheo1 said in IPv6 WAN Track Interface not assigning addresses to LAN/Public LAN:
You obviously don't know how to provide a solution, because I am fully operational with IPv6. It's not nonsense to a certified engineer.
I have also been operational with IPv6 for over 9 years, initially with a 6in4 tunnel, but the past 3.5 years as provided by my ISP. What sort of engineer? I'm a Cisco CCNA and have been working with networks since before Ethernet and IP, in fact before packets were used. I also did Novell CNA & CNE, many years ago. I also did Electrical Engineering, with telecommunications systems for my elective subjects.
You introduced NAT to this thread. Why do you need NAT to get IPv6 working? I've never had to use it. NAT is a hack to get around the IPv4 address shortage, so there's no need for it with IPv6.
As for my working network, it uses DHCPv6-PD from my ISP. This provides a /128 WAN address for pfSense and a /56 prefix, which I can split into individual /64s. I currently use 3. I use track interface and it works fine. I also have some Unique Local Addresses configured. They work too, but can't reach the internet by using those addresses. Tell me again why you need NAT, manually configured addresses, etc., to get your network to work. Again, if you turn off link local (is that even possible?), you will break things that IPv6 depends on. Link local addresses are mandatory for IPv6. Every device capable of IPv6 has a link local address (FE80:: /16), even if it has no other IPv6 address.
-
@JKnott IPv6 This firewall software is so bugged....and I see people modifying the radvd to make it work. It's actually the Track Interface. What will happen if you use the Track Interface, the LAN will have an IP from the Global Gateway's pool when it actually need a static address in the 2000 or above...omitting the Global IPv6's WAN network. When the lease expires (because it's tracking one of the the 16 delegated /64....with a /56), it will stop working and you will need to reboot the firewall to gain a new lease. That's not how it's supposed to be applied to the private LANs.
NAT is not a hack. It's a translation of private IP address to one public address. You need to use a static IPv6 that is not routable to the Internet, but will translate to the WAN's /128, which brings me to the next situation. It was all being blocked.
"Tell me again why you need NAT, manually configured addresses, etc., to get your network to work. Again, if you turn off link local (is that even possible?), you will break things that IPv6 depends on."
We were doing troubleshooting a long time ago while following Netgate's instructions and it didn't work. I then started observing the firewall logs and they were all blocked...localhosts and all. I created a manual NAT rule (because of the required link-local and local hosts including the LAN translations) that allows everything to be translated over the WAN and it started working.
When the Automatic Outbound NAT is checked, it's as if the product was locked down. IPv4 works just fine. Most of the time, it's the other way around.....the product works with most rules being applied to allow all traffic then can become locked down or blocked by an organization or person.