Re: [Cerowrt-devel] 6relayd

[Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8108 bytes --]

Fyi as stated earlier i made the switch to odhcpd yesterday. With that i also switched routing from individual tables to source-constrained routes in the maintable.

Cheers,
Steven




Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> schrieb:
>On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Matt Mathis <mattmathis@google.com>
>wrote:
>> I'm finally getting back to this.
>>
>>> Hmm. if you uncomment everything in /etc/dnsmasq.conf and restart
>>> dnsmasq what happens? If you have got /64s you would end up doing
>>> slaac and ra announcements via dnsmasq in this case.
>>>
>>> That was on by default before (and what was tested in feburary).
>Later
>>> on 6relayd started having a race with it and seemed to be "the
>>> future", so I disabled the dnsmasq version, thinking that 6relayd
>was
>>> the answer. It's entirely possible that's
>>> merely configured wrong.
>>
>>
>> Now I get global /64's on my LAN interfaces, but I am still not
>answering
>> dhcp6 for attached hosts.  I retried both version of the 6relayd init
>> script....
>>
>> dnsmasq.conf contains:
>> enable-ra
>> dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:se00,ra-names,ra-stateless
>> dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:sw00,ra-names,ra-stateless
>> dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:gw00,ra-names,ra-stateless
>> dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:sw10,ra-names,ra-stateless
>> dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:gw10,ra-names,ra-stateless
>>
>>
>> I am running: Linux cerowrt 3.10.24 #1 Tue Dec 24 10:50:15 PST
>2013.....
>> which might be just a bit too fresh....  Would you suggest another?
>
>You are not getting slaac either?
>
>An ifconfig on an interface and a packet dump of ipv6 packets would be
>helpful.
>
>> I have a spare 3700, so I think I will try some alternate vintages.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --MM--
>> The best way to predict the future is to create it.  - Alan Kay
>>
>> Privacy matters!  We know from recent events that people are using
>our
>> services to speak in defiance of unjust governments.   We treat
>privacy and
>> security as matters of life and death, because for some users, they
>are.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org>
>wrote:
>>> > On 03.01.2014 19:43, Dave Taht wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> I was also experiencing a race condition with dnsmasq, while I
>had it
>>> >> enabling
>>> >> ra and dhcpv6 via dnsmasq. At the moment that's turned off by
>default,
>>> >> but
>>> >> I did rather prefer having dns names for my ipv6 addresses...
>>> >
>>> > Well 6relayd and odhcpd collect hostnames of clients acquired via
>>> > stateful
>>> > DHCPv6 and export them to dnsmasq in an additional hostfiles. At
>least
>>> > that
>>> > seemed to work when I last tried it a few months ago. The only
>>> > disadvantage
>>> > is that there is no "ra-names" feature there.
>>>
>>> Getting to names from dhcpv4 to slaac was a neat hack and a
>potential
>>> RFC. So i figure spending the time to add the same functionality
>into
>>> into something other than dnsmasq would be useful towards writing
>that
>>> rfc.
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> is there a good way for 6relayd and dnsmasq-dhcpv6 to co-exist?
>>> >
>>> > Ideally they could coexist in a way that you could select dnsmasq
>and /
>>> > or
>>> > odhcpd for different interfaces on the same machine. odhcpd
>supports
>>> > that
>>> > but dnsmasq the last time I've looked seemed to use a single
>socket
>>> > binding
>>> > to all interfaces for DHCP/v6 which prevents coexistance from
>working
>>> > correctly because odhcpd / 6relayd can't bind the socket after
>dnsmasq
>>> > did
>>> > and vice versa.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>> Feel free to provide me with some debugging information of the
>system
>>> >>> while
>>> >>> PD fails for you so I can have a look at the probable cause:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * "ifstatus ge00" (replace ge00 with your IPv6 upstream
>interface)
>>> >>> * "ip addr list dev ge01" (replace ge01 with the interface your
>>> >>> downstream
>>> >>> router is connected)
>>> >>> * "ps | grep 6relayd"
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Anyway I will migrate all the stuff to odhcpd soon (it's
>successor
>>> >>> which
>>> >>> shares a good part of the codebase but is a bit better
>integrated with
>>> >>> the
>>> >>> rest of the environment).
>>> >>
>>> >> same question re dnsmasq.
>>> >
>>> > Yeah as pointed out coexistence is a matter of binding sockets.
>odhcpd
>>> > will
>>> > bring the functionality of dynamically enabling / disabling
>DHCPv4/v6 on
>>> > interfaces without restarting the daemon and loosing state. This
>is one
>>> > of
>>> > the main reasons for the change and very much eases things for
>>> > high-level
>>> > protocols that do dynamic wan/lan detection.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> >
>>> > Steven
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Steven
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 03.01.2014 18:31, Dave Taht wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM, cb.list6 <cb.list6@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Dave Taht
><dave.taht@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> At one level I am happy to figure out this is a recently
>introduced
>>> >>>>>> bug.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On the other hand I am not sure if it is 6relayd.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> What version of cero was working for you?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I am not entirely sure, but i think it was from September.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> CB
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> At the moment I lack the ability to debug the breakage in ipv6
>>> >>>> dhcp-pd
>>> >>>> (which is odhcpd) (I am travelling).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I will on my next stop next week (tuesday) setup a dhcpv6pd
>server
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> see what I can see.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Jan 3, 2014 12:21 AM, "cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Hi,
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I have been using CeroWRT on Comcast with a 3800 for about 6
>>> >>>>>>> month.
>>> >>>>>>> The
>>> >>>>>>> DHCP-PD config has always been a little unstable for me, but
>>> >>>>>>> working.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I recently upgraded to:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>    root@cerowrt:/etc/config# uname -a
>>> >>>>>>> Linux cerowrt 3.10.24 #1 Tue Dec 24 10:50:15 PST 2013 mips
>>> >>>>>>> GNU/Linux
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> My WAN gets a /128, but i cannot get DHCP-PD to work to get
>>> >>>>>>> addresses
>>> >>>>>>> on
>>> >>>>>>> the rest of my interfaces.  The router does seem to have
>good IPv6
>>> >>>>>>> access.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I fiddled with the 6relayd config and came up with this, but
>it
>>> >>>>>>> does
>>> >>>>>>> not
>>> >>>>>>> work.  Any pointers on how to get this back on track?  The
>result
>>> >>>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>> below config is that the /128 from the WAN interfaces is now
>>> >>>>>>> present
>>> >>>>>>> on
>>> >>>>>>> all
>>> >>>>>>> the interfaces but my attached computers get no addresses.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> config server 'default'
>>> >>>>>>>           option rd 'server'
>>> >>>>>>>           option dhcpv6 'server'
>>> >>>>>>>           option management_level '1'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'ge01'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'gw00'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'gw01'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'gw10'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'gw11'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'se00'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'sw00'
>>> >>>>>>>           list network 'sw10'
>>> >>>>>>>           option fallback_relay 'rd dhcpv6 ndp'
>>> >>>>>>>           option master 'ge00'
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> root@cerowrt:/etc/config# uname -a
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> >>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> >>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Täht
>>>
>>> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
>>> http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html
>>
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Dave Täht
>
>Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
>http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10220 bytes --]