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

    IPv6 WAN Gateway monitoring reports 100% packet loss

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPv6
    36 Posts 6 Posters 5.7k 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.
    • ?
      A Former User @luckman212
      last edited by A Former User

      @luckman212 said in IPv6 WAN Gateway monitoring reports 100% packet loss:

      -lf dpinger

      lease answer these other questions:

      how is your IPv6 configured on WAN & LAN interfaces (DHCP6, SLAAC etc)
             WAN and LAN are both statically assigned IPv6 address
             DHCPv6 is running within my internal network but is being handled by raspberry pi running ISC Kea
      
      are you using PPPoE?
             No, PPPoE is not configured on firewall
      
      what is the result of manually running /etc/rc.checkv6addrchange
                no output, no change in IPv6 gateway monitoring in GUI     
      
      please also paste the output of pgrep -lf dpinger
      
      8312 /usr/local/bin/dpinger -S -r 0 -i 
                   WANGWv6 -B 2a02:yyyy:yyyy:y:yyyy:yyyy:yyyy:yyyy -p /var/run/dpinger_
                   WANGWv6~fa5faaa6~2a02:xxxx:xxxxx:x:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx.pid -u /var/run/dpinger_
                   WANGWv6~fa5faaa6~2a02:xxxx:xxxxx:x:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx.sock -C /etc/rc.gateway_alarm -d 1 -s 500 -l 2000 -t 60000 -A 1000 -D 500 -L 20 2a02:8xxxx:xxxxx:x:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx
         7987 /usr/local/bin/dpinger -S -r 0 -i 
                   WANGWv4 -B yyy.yyy.yyy.10 -p /var/run/dpinger_WANGWv4~yyy.yyy.yyy.10~nnn.nnn.nnn.1.pid -u /var/run/dpinger_
                   WANGWv4~yyy.yyy.yyy.10~nnn.nnn.nnn.1.sock -C /etc/rc.gateway_alarm -d 1 -s 500 -l 2000 -t 60000 -A 1000 -D 500 -L 20 nnn.nnn.n.1
      
      luckman212L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • luckman212L
        luckman212 LAYER 8 @A Former User
        last edited by

        @vortex21 Ok so you have static IPv6's configured -- well then this appears to be a different problem, not really the one that my PR is designed to solve!

        The pgrep -lf dpinger output you pasted above, is that from before or after you re-saved your interface config? Hard to tell, but looking at it, I would guess after (because it appears to be bound [-B 2a02:] to the correct IP). Can you post the "before" output as well?

        ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • ?
          A Former User @luckman212
          last edited by

          @luckman212

          Immediately after reboot
          pgrep -lf dpinger

          43507 /usr/local/bin/dpinger -S -r 0 -i
          WANGWv6 -B 2a02::22 -p /var/run/dpinger_
          WANGWv6~fa5faaa6~2a02::38.pid -u /var/run/dpinger_
          WANGWv6~fa5faaa6~2a02::38.sock -C /etc/rc.gateway_alarm -d 1 -s 500 -l 2000 -t 60000 -A 1000 -D 500 -L 20 2a02::38

          42959 /usr/local/bin/dpinger -S -r 0 -i
          WANGWv4 -B -p /var/run/dpinger_
          WANGWv4~yyy.yyy.yyy.10~nnn.nnn.nnn.1.pid -u /var/run/dpinger_
          WANGWv4~yyy.yyy.yyy.10~nnn.nnn.nnn.1.sock -C /etc/rc.gateway_alarm -d 1 -s 500 -l 2000 -t 60000 -A 1000 -D 500 -L 20 nnn.nnn.nnn.1
          [22.05-RC][admin@pfsense]/root:

          Reporting GUI login
          Message from syslogd@gw at Jun 21 16:46:30 ...
          php-fpm[384]: /index.php: Successful login for user 'admin' from: 2a02::1 (Local Database)

          Immediately after WAN interface save
          [22.05-RC][admin@pfsense]/root: pgrep -lf dpinger
          63333 /usr/local/bin/dpinger -S -r 0 -i
          WANGWv6 -B 2a02::22 -p /var/run/dpinger_
          WANGWv6~fa5faaa6~2a02::38.pid -u /var/run/dpinger_
          WANGWv6~fa5faaa6~2a02::38.sock -C /etc/rc.gateway_alarm -d 1 -s 500 -l 2000 -t 60000 -A 1000 -D 500 -L 20 2a02:38
          63257 /usr/local/bin/dpinger -S -r 0 -i WANGWv4 -B yyy.yyy.yyy.10 -p /var/run/dpinger_WANGWv4~yyy.yyy.yyy.10~nnn.nnn.nnn.1.pid -u /var/run/dpinger_WANGWv4~yyy.yyy.yyy.10~nnn.nnn.nnn.1.sock -C /etc/rc.gateway_alarm -d 1 -s 500 -l 2000 -t 60000 -A 1000 -D 500 -L 20 nnn.nnn.nnn.1
          [22.05-RC][admin@pfsense]/root:

          luckman212L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • luckman212L
            luckman212 LAYER 8 @A Former User
            last edited by

            @vortex21 Makes no sense- the dpinger process and args from "before" are identical to the "after". So there must be a difference in the interface config.

            Can you post before & after of ifconfig -v and ndp -a?

            It would help if you didn't redact the info, if you're worried about privacy use a password protected pastebin, PM, etc...

            ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • ?
              A Former User @luckman212
              last edited by A Former User

              @luckman212
              Hi,

              Took the output of ifconfig -v from before and after and use diff to find the differences

              • diff after.txt before.txt
                2c2
                < igb0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1492

              igb0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1492
              23c23
              < igb2: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500


              igb2: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
              50c50
              < igb2.3: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1492


              igb2.3: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1492
              62c62
              < igb0.2: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1492


              igb0.2: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1492
              78,79c78

              When looking at ndp -a and comparing before and after saving the WAN interface, the difference is four link local interfaces

              fe80::21c:ffff:fef0:b5e%igb0 00:0c:29:f0:0b:5e igb0 2s R
              fe80::21c:ffff:febe:772b%igb0 00:0c:29:be:77:2b igb0 13s R
              fe80::21d:bbff:fec9:5938%igb2.3 00:1d:aa:f9:59:38 igb2.3 24s R R
              fe80::21c:ffff:fe38:293e%igb0 00:0c:29:88:39:3e igb0 23h59m39s S

              luckman212L johnpozJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • luckman212L
                luckman212 LAYER 8 @A Former User
                last edited by

                @vortex21 The forum is mangling your output. Can you please put it on a private pastebin instead of just posting the diff output which is not easy to decipher.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • johnpozJ
                  johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @A Former User
                  last edited by

                  @vortex21 another option would be to use the code block - that should help with formatting

                  codeblock.jpg

                  An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                  If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                  Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                  SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.7.2, 24.11

                  ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • ?
                    A Former User @johnpoz
                    last edited by

                    @johnpoz

                    Status After reboot

                    5ff2f7da-91dc-4563-852a-d2bafe8f1f90-image.png

                    Status After Reboot and WAN save

                    3b69ae2e-8eff-43e7-a40a-56ee60fefd19-image.png

                    ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • ?
                      A Former User @A Former User
                      last edited by

                      @vortex21
                      Hi, Upgraded to 22.05 release today and after reboot the IPv6 WAN gateway monitoring reported 100% packet loss, saving the WAN interface again and applying changes fixed it as before

                      ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • ?
                        A Former User @A Former User
                        last edited by

                        @vortex21

                        Hi, I reconfigured my network yesterday to eliminate the pfSense WAN connection being on a VLAN on the external network port. The WAN interface is now the physical interface card my problem of IPv6 WAN Gateway monitoring reporting 100% loss no longer occurs.
                        So it appears the problem was related to the use of a VLAN.

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