From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from chi.subsignal.org (cxd-2-pt.tunnel.tserv11.ams1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f14:ed::2]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D04202102 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2014 06:23:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.29.8.221] (tmo-106-118.customers.d1-online.com [80.187.106.118]) by chi.subsignal.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 448391260EE; Sat, 18 Jan 2014 15:25:02 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: <52C6FE3C.6020207@openwrt.org> <52C7D4CA.9030108@openwrt.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----I8A1CQOIUPHL2THIOZ51HQEUY7R9U9" From: Steven Barth Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 15:23:12 +0100 To: Dave Taht ,Matt Mathis Message-ID: <828011e1-b43f-4b38-ae9c-25b98fbd1dc5@email.android.com> Cc: "cb.list6" , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] 6relayd X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 14:23:37 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 14:23:37 -0000 ------I8A1CQOIUPHL2THIOZ51HQEUY7R9U9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 schrieb: >On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Matt Mathis >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 >wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Steven Barth >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 >wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Dave Taht > >>> >>>>> 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" >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 ------I8A1CQOIUPHL2THIOZ51HQEUY7R9U9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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
dh
 cp6 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 6re
 layd
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 1
 0:50:15
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# un
 ame
-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
------I8A1CQOIUPHL2THIOZ51HQEUY7R9U9--