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

    global IPV6 addresses are not routed into the LAN and to the client

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IPv6
    multiwanfailoveripv6ipv4dual stack
    4 Posts 2 Posters 432 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.
    • G
      Globaltrader312
      last edited by Globaltrader312

      I have the following problem.

      I currently have 3 Internet connections WAN,

      WAN 1 Cable internet Vodafone Germany 1000 Down 50 UP Static IPV4 and IPV6 per DHCPv4 and DHCPDv6 Native Dual Stack no DS Lite.

      WAN 2 VDSL 175 down 46 UP Native Dual Stuck per PPPOE with VLAN TAG 7 no DS Lite

      Mobile 4G /5G only Public IPV4 without Static IP only DHCP.

      I would like to configure / have partially configured the following.

      I would like to use WAN 1 as tier 1 I have configured this way I would like to use VDSL as tier 2 already configured.
      I would like to use WAN 3 as tier 3.

      I have created a gateway group and added the DNS server and the DNS resolver.

      Furthermore, I have added the Google DNS IPV4 and IPV6 as ping where the link should be recognised as down by packet loss.

      Currently I have the problem that I only get a LINK Local FE80 address assigned by VDSL via PPPOE and I don't know exactly why actually the PFsense should retrieve the /56 prefix via Autoconf via DHCPDv6 and assign a Global IPV6 address and actually on LAN routes so that the clients have IPV4 and V6.
      ping to ipv6.google.com works via gui.

      The second problem is that I neither get the Global IPV6 addresses from the Cable internet connection on LAN nor from the VDSL.

      See screen shots I think I have almost everything correct but I seem to be missing something and need help.

      as you can see on the screen shot where you can see the interfaces status, WAN 1 did not request a 56 prefix but again a 128 prefix like during installation.

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.57.33.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.58.24.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.58.30.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.58.44.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.58.57.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.59.07.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.59.22.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.59.32.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.59.42.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 02.59.59.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 03.01.12.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 03.01.26.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 03.01.54.png

      Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 03.02.53.png

      Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Bob.DigB
        Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @Globaltrader312
        last edited by

        @Globaltrader312 Don't do NAT for the Firewall itself, don't do NAT for IPv6 in general.
        IPv6 on the LAN interface has to be set to Track, not SLAAC.

        G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • G
          Globaltrader312 @Bob.Dig
          last edited by

          @Bob-Dig

          tried it with Track interface, but I can only select either WAN 1 or WAN 2 as the parent interface, and that didn't work either, which is why I selected SLAAC for testing, but unfortunately that didn't work either.

          it has to work so that when WAN 1 goes down I can then use the IPv& prefix from the DSL including IPV4 and vice versa when WAN 1 is UP again.

          Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 13.04.19.png

          I have now set it to Track interface see screen shot and selected WAN 1 as the parent interface.

          now LAN only shows the local 192 address but no more IPV6 neither local nor global

          Bildschirmfoto 2024-05-05 um 13.05.35.png

          G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • G
            Globaltrader312 @Globaltrader312
            last edited by

            @Globaltrader312 I have now also removed the firewall rules under NAT

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