Status of the IPv6ified pfSense
-
Before anyone cry "SEARCH THE FORUM!" or "pfSense already have IPv6" let me just say:
I did search, and all I found was relatively old. No stickies that mention this (by this time VERY important topic…).
The fact that you can hack a pfSense by using an SSH login to get IPv6 set up is just a workaround. Not a solution.
Yes, there should be a bounty. Unfortunately, I am in no position to pay anything at the moment, but as soon as I am, I will actually donate some for this.
So - I do not demand anything. I would just like to know what the status is and if someone could make a sticky with a topic like "Status of IPv6" and add a little to it now and then.
This is what my "ideal" IPv6 version of pfSense would look like:
At the initial screen, one selection - Use: IPv4, IPv6 or IPv6 via tunnel (drop-down)
The rest of the interface should then be adapted to that choice. In other words - selecting IPv6 or IPv6 via tunnel should change all inputs regarding IP addresses so that an IPv6 address is expected.
Not sure if IPv4 support should be an option in an IPv6 network (possible boxes that do not support IPv6 yet?), but that need to be enabled, then.
Here is a big point to me:
A lot of people are now trying to figure out how to move to IPv6. Small offices, bigger offices, home users etc. And it is a fantastic opportunity for pfSense to get into more places. Everyone wants an easy way. I would love to be able to tell people:
"Set up pfSense and it will take care of the IPv6 stuff for you."
Maybe a slogan like "pfSense takes care of IPv6 so you don't have to!" kidding! :-)
Seriously - giving people the two options of IPv6 through a tunnel and IPv6 provided by their ISP is a great two-step plan to get it rolling immediately. But in terms of the pfSense interface, it means that a lot of pages has to change and it is a big job.
Seems like everyone around the world is holding back until they are forced to change. Why not be ahead of the pack and provide something that sets an example to follow?
Another important question here that just popped into my mind: How well do the developers of pfSense know IPv6? Is there a lack of devs with IPv6 knowledge? Should I try to ask some devs I know if they have any time to donate?
-
http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/show/177 and yes, none of our devs have extensive ipv6 knowledge. we cannot even get real ipv6 links.
-
I like an answer like that :-) Easy and straight to the point. It explains the current situation.
As I am not a programmer, I can not offer that kind of help, but I will do whatever is in my power to drum up some attention around this need and maybe that will bring in a programmer or two.
Thank you for that and the link. Maybe you should make this a sticky. :-)
-
The above isn't really true, several of us do have IPv6 experience. There is very little demand for it now. For the latest status, always see this page.
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Is_there_IPv6_support_available -
Yes, there should be a bounty. Unfortunately, I am in no position to pay anything at the moment, but as soon as I am, I will actually donate some for this.
The above isn't really true, several of us do have IPv6 experience. There is very little demand for it now. For the latest status, always see this page.
http://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Is_there_IPv6_support_availableWould folks be interested in a bounty?
pfsense and an outdated switch (easy to replace) are the last blocks that we need before we offer IPv6 native services, something I'd like to do. I know full IPv6 support isn't coming until 'after 2.0'; maybe 2.1 or so.
I'd be happy to throw out a couple hundred bucks toward a bounty, if others are interested helping too. Maybe make sure it actually does make it into 2.1…. :-)
-
Would folks be interested in a bounty?
That is what it'll take. Three people currently make a full time living on the project, plus a handful who make part of their living on it, and those people do the bulk of the development and testing work. We're hoping to pull together enough that we can spend a considerable amount of time on it, after 2.0 is released. For the time being it's not something that can be even considered as we are fully dedicated to finishing 2.0. But when it gets to that point, we'll definitely be seeking contributions to cover the implementation.
I'll post to this thread, the blog and mailing lists with info when we get to that point. thanks!
