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

    Static IPv6 /48 trying to give /64 to firewall to hand out

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    31 Posts 5 Posters 2.7k 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.
    • johnpozJ
      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @PhlMike
      last edited by

      @PhlMike where did you get a /112 who gave you that?

      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 2.8, 24.11

      P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        PhlMike @johnpoz
        last edited by

        @johnpoz Cogent gives me that free with every line. Just like they give me a /29 ipv4. I lease 2x /24 ipv4s from Cogent and I have ARIN that gave me another /24. Then ARIN also gave me the /40.

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

          @PhlMike you got a IPv4 /24 from Arin - recently?

          Why would they give you a /112, that is not really a valid use case prefix.. Why would not give you a /64, or better yet delegate a /60 or /56 to use so you could subnet some /64s out of that.

          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 2.8, 24.11

          P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • stephenw10S
            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
            last edited by

            It's the 'wrong' way to do it for sure. But I would expect to be able to use some IPs from the /112 as a temporary setup.

            As you say, by not using anything from the /48 you are free to add that 'correctly' when you can.

            P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P
              PhlMike @johnpoz
              last edited by

              @johnpoz Yes, but its for NAT64 purposes. So ultimately its temporary. I had been in talks with a company that is willing to do lease to own or financing of /20 IPv4s. But I have to wait until 2024 to expend any extra debt.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • P
                PhlMike @stephenw10
                last edited by

                @stephenw10 Yeah, it's weird for a Teir1 ISP to do. Ultimately they want you to user the /29 and /112 to ROUTE your own IP ranges.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stephenw10S
                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                  last edited by

                  A /112 seems valid as a transport subnet.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • DerelictD
                    Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate @PhlMike
                    last edited by

                    @PhlMike

                    @PhlMike said in Static IPv6 /48 trying to give /64 to firewall to hand out:

                    @Derelict I just have the /112 that is workable. I can't give anything bigger than that right now. The /48's that Cogent allowed out of my /40 are not working.

                    I would, personally, not waste any time on a patchwork, temporary setup. I would concentrate on doing it correctly, as in getting BGP working.

                    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)

                    P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • P
                      PhlMike @Derelict
                      last edited by

                      @Derelict said in Static IPv6 /48 trying to give /64 to firewall to hand out:

                      I would, personally, not waste any time on a patchwork, temporary setup. I would concentrate on doing it correctly, as in getting BGP working.

                      You buying? I need 6 FS S5860-20SQ's at about $9,600, I also need 3 Mikrotik CCR2116-12G-4S+ (which are on backorder) and another 3 Mikrotik CRS326-24S+2Q+RM for another $3,800. Not to mention another $2,500 in network engineers time. Including hour+ long meetings with my ISP's engineers where I am literally paying everyone on that Zoom call over $300/hr. Unlike my stupid car dealership, I accept American Express....

                      Then there is also the possibility of downtime, network packets may drop. Which means I need to send out no fewer than 3 email blasts at least a month in advance and then inevitably delay because "it's too close to tax season" or they have "deadlines" so they expect to be working at 1:30am on a weekend. 🤦 Which then means I need to reschedule another 3 months down the road when all the engineers and consultants are all available at the same time.

                      You ever build a house? You try getting a plumber, an electrician and the framer all in at the same time to literally discuss a washer and dryer placement on short notice.

                      My customer would like IPv6 sooner for testing, not production.

                      johnpozJ DerelictD 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • johnpozJ
                        johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @PhlMike
                        last edited by

                        @PhlMike said in Static IPv6 /48 trying to give /64 to firewall to hand out:

                        My customer would like IPv6 sooner for testing, not production.

                        Whats the old saying good, fast, cheap - pick two..

                        IPv6 isn't going anywhere fast that is for sure.. if he has a public IPv4, does he need more Ipv4 that you can not provide? What is their hurry for IPv6.. Its been round for almost 25 years already.. And many isps don't even yet provide it. Or if they do - its a shit deployment..

                        To be honest I wouldn't be in a "hurry".. A few years back company I worked for finally pulled the trigger and we got /32 from arin.. Sure I created the routing objects and got it being advertised out of some locations. Did any of the customers have any desire - not a one!

                        I am with Derelict here - do it correctly, if it takes more time - so be it. Not like your the last guy to get IPv6.. And the worlds been waiting for you to actually start using it ;)

                        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 2.8, 24.11

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • DerelictD
                          Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate @PhlMike
                          last edited by Derelict

                          @PhlMike And you're trying to fit a camel through the eye of a needle.

                          Use a hurricane tunnel then. At least they'll have a /48 to use instead of a useless portion of a /112.

                          IPv6 simply cannot be tested in any meaningful manner without at least a /56 routed to your customer.

                          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)

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