Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users
-
@jknott you mean that i change the configuration of CPE (Modem) and what is the usage ? cpe must send a message to client(windows) to set the valid time for old delegated prefix to zero and use new delegated prefix instead of old delegated prefix .
your answer i think cannot change any things, please describe me more about your answer if you are sure that is true and work fine. -
It's a setting in pfSense, on the WAN interface, that tells it to not release the prefix. IPv6 uses something called DUID to retain the same prefix. If that setting is not selected, the prefix will not be retained.
-
In the WAN configuration, ensure "Do not allow PD/Address release" is selected. That should keep your prefix from changing.
That is true and works, but it don't works if the prefix changed nevertheless (hope my english is ok) at power loss or so.
In my opinion pfsense is not accepting changing ipv6 adresses as they exist in germany and maybe somwhere else. so there is no solution to changing firewallrules or their sideeffects. So you can not build rules with the prefix as variable plus identifyer.pfadmin
-
Get a new ISP. They are probably not properly honoring the DUID. pfSense can only work with what it is given.
Right. It is a complete pain when your PD is changed by your ISP. That is why they are not supposed to do that.
Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM) -
That is what I mean. You ignore the reality in germany. A few changes and it is out of world. A changing IPv6 is nothing forbidden, but you want that I change my provider. AVM can work whith it. Why you won't?
-
If you need a firewall that will automatically track a changing prefix delegation and adjust firewall rules, etc, pfSense is not for you. A lot of effort has been put into working with ISPs that do the right thing - and it works well. Ultimately the ISP controls the user experience here. Yours apparently doesn't care and wants to treat IPv6 like IPv4+NAT.
You can probably ease the pain somewhat using firewall aliases but it will still require manual intervention.
You can see if someone has opened a similar feature request on redmine.pfsense.org and, if not, do so. I am not going to do it since I do not know all of the specifics of your situation.
Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM) -
@derelict said in Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users:
Get a new ISP. They are probably not properly honoring the DUID. pfSense can only work with what it is given.
Many German ISPs actually enforce a regular IP change for IPv4 and prefix change for IPv6. That is intended by the ISPs because a fixed IP is a premium option for their business offerings. You cannot change this with any option on pfSense, but for IPv6 you can switch to using a tunnel broker like He.net.
-
@grimson said in Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users:
Many German ISPs actually enforce a regular IP change for IPv4 and prefix change for IPv6.
Criminal.
-
@grimson said in Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users:
@derelict said in Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users:
Get a new ISP. They are probably not properly honoring the DUID. pfSense can only work with what it is given.
Many German ISPs actually enforce a regular IP change for IPv4 and prefix change for IPv6. That is intended by the ISPs because a fixed IP is a premium option for their business offerings. You cannot change this with any option on pfSense, but for IPv6 you can switch to using a tunnel broker like He.net.
That's nuts! I can understand static addresses being considered premium on IPv4, where there is a severe shortage of addresses, but that doesn't hold with IPv6, with it's incredibly huge address space. That's just blatant greed.
There is a possible work around for this, assuming you're only using host name lookup for the local LAN and not from outside. It's possible to assign Unique Local Addresses, in addition to the global addresses. Just configure your DNS so that it points to the ULA rather than global addresses.
-
There is no equivalent in the IPv4 world. If you are provisioned such that you have routed IPv4 space and use that space on inside subnets, the ISP simply cannot change them on you. Everything would break.
It is ludicrous to think IPv6 would be different.
The only reason they have gotten away with dynamic IPv4 addressing for so long is we all use NAT and set our own static inside addresses.
The answer is not to work around their nonsense but to stop paying them until they do it right. Penalize the stupid ones and reward those who do it correctly.
-
I can stop paying with stopping be a part of the internet. Thats it what you want from me if you say this. Maybe you are right, but it helps nothing here. There is a feature request from someone else, I will look for it and paste it here.
-
As has been stated, if your ISP has broken IPv6 (and it sounds like that is the case), I would bug them about it. The S in ISP is for Service.
In the meantime, as has been mentioned, you can get a static /48 - free - from www.tunnelbroker.net.
-
I'm sorry but "change of ISP" or "stop paying" is not an answer...
I live in Belgium and I've the exact same problem, ALL the ISP give dynamic prefix and they don't give a shit about my complains.
There is a feature request for this problem on the tracker
https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/4881
With this feature, we could use ULA on the LAN and nat the prefix... But it's dead since 2-3 years :(
Pfsense has already static NPT, just make it dynamic please
English is not my first language, sorry
-
https://www.tunnelbroker.net/
-
"Yeah, just use a tunnel broker and add 10-15ms of latency for each ipv6 connexion, it's fine"
No, it's not. I realy don't understand your attitude... Pfsense is already capable of doing static NPT, you know it's a thing and there is a feature request for dynamic NPT... You can implement it and solve this stupid issue...
-
@chaispaquichui said in Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users:
"Yeah, just use a tunnel broker and add 10-15ms of latency for each ipv6 connexion, it's fine"
So what? Those few ms won't kill you.
NAT is ugly and has to die as fast as possible, reviving it for IPv6 would be more than stupid.
-
There is a HE pop in Amsterdam, NL - I doubt that is going to A 10-15ms to your path.. Maybe 2 or 3 tops.. Its only what 200 miles from one side of belgium to the other side of NL.. So yeah lets at worse call it 3 ms..
Also one in Frankfort - about the same distance.. Paris as well isn't far from any point in Belgium... So you have like 3 that I know of that are what 3ms from anywhere you could be Belgium.. I could see your point if closest pop was 3000 miles away from you... But EU is pretty freaking tiny when it comes to total latency anywhere.. Adding 3ms is not going to be any sort of issue.
Added bonus is the /48 you get.. You can use that on ANY isp you move too.. I have had the same /48 since 2013.. My current isp doesn't even have any ipv6.. Same addressing...
That is going to be way better than doing some nonsense nat on ipv6 because your isp is stupid.
-
@chaispaquichui said in Dynamic IPv6 Prefix assignment issue in xDSL users:
"Yeah, just use a tunnel broker and add 10-15ms of latency for each ipv6 connexion, it's fine"
No, it's not. I realy don't understand your attitude... Pfsense is already capable of doing static NPT, you know it's a thing and there is a feature request for dynamic NPT... You can implement it and solve this stupid issue...
Your ISP can deploy IPv6 correctly and solve this stupid issue.
-
I understood you are not going the implement dynamic NPT but I will stand my case until the end !
Thx for you answer jognpoz but ironically, I know this pop in Amsterdam... I used it during 2 years, before my ISP start giving me native IPv6 addresses. I know for a fact that it gives me 10 or 15 ms of extra latency, I experimented it :(
"NAT is ugly and has to die as fast as possible, reviving it for IPv6 would be more than stupid."
There is no such thing as an "evil" protocol. The NAT you are referring to is "'PAT", NPT is not the same.
I'm not saying you should always do NAT with IPv6, far from it ! But NPT has some uses cases
- You want to do IPv6 multihoming withouth BGP ? You can use NPT
- You want to be able to leave your ISP without having to renumbered your LAN ? You can use NPT
- You want to give the middle finger to greedy ISP who gives you dynamic prefix ? You can use NPT
"That is going to be way better than doing some nonsense nat on ipv6 because your isp is stupid."
It's not "nonsense", it's a solution to a real problem :( My ISP is not supid, he is greedy. If I want a static prefix, I can... I just need to pay 2 or 3 times the actual price of my connexion. And this ISP is not the first to do that and he is not going to be last.
You know what is truly ironic ? I just discovered that pfsense is able to do PAT for IPv6 !
My problem is solved !
But it's ugly and I don't want to do that... Pfsense can do static NPT and PAT for IPv6, please add dynamic NPT, it's less ugly
-
Are you kidding me ?
Edit : okey, thx for the clarification !
