[Cerowrt-devel] Latest IPv6 Updates
dave.taht at gmail.com
Fri Dec 28 22:05:19 EST 2012
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Maciej Soltysiak <maciej at soltysiak.com> wrote:
> Upnp works fine.
> Ssdpd doesn't, not sure why, it's late now. will test tomorrow.
> p.s. /use/shin/simple_qos fails on non-existant /etc/functions.sh
> Am I doing something wrong?
No. Probably that changed. You can comment that out. I see also that
nfq_codel on the nano-m build failed to link right. Might just be a
bug on that build. insmod sch_nfq_codel on cero.
> On 28 Dec 2012 21:19, "Dave Taht" <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Steven Barth <cyrus at openwrt.org> wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> > the following updates / changes for IPv6 have been commited to OpenWrt
>> > in
>> > the last days. Most of these affect RFC 6204 CE-compliance, some are
>> > convenience changes.
>> > Feel free to merge and test CeroWrt.
>> I have merged with openwrt head, and updated to dnsmasq 2.66test4, and
>> also folded in the tiny luci upnp fix to the '&' issue. I'm not really
>> sure if that last is the right thing, it's supposed to be
>> I am still not in a position to test anything cerowrt related myself
>> right now, although I am down to a mere 20 miles between me and the
>> yurtlab and 50 from isc.
>> I am relieved to hear that amazon claims they will get new supplies of
>> the wndr3800 by jan 5.
>> I am staring at the bunch of hardware I ordered in something of a
>> panic - dreamplug, wndr4300, the nanostations, a couple bus pirates, a
>> nexus 7, and trying to figure out a direction to move forward that
>> makes sense.
>> > * Detect and delegate IPv6-specific MTU from upstream interfaces (e.g.
>> > tunnels, pppoe, etc.) and propagate them to downstream interfaces
>> > (supporting cases where IPv4-MTU and IPv6-MTU differ, e.g. 6in4, 6rd,
>> > 6to4,
>> > ...)
>> Excellent! PPPoE?
>> > * Add a default null-route for delegated prefixes (CE-requirement WPD-6)
>> > This fixes routing loops in case packets with a destination within an
>> > unused
>> > / unassigned part of a delegated prefix are received.
>> > * Added support for site-borders (interfaces which ULA-traffic might not
>> > cross) as specified in CE-requirement ULA-4
>> > * Added support to override CE-requirement ULA-5 for NPT-setups (iirc
>> > not
>> > relevant if dnsmasq is used, as it does not follow ULA-5).
>> > Documentation on http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/uci/network6 has been
>> > updated.
>> > Btw. Simon Kelley released 2.66-test4 which fixes some bugs related to
>> > stateful DHCPv6 and should make it usable finally. Also the new
>> > MTU-propagation mentioned above is now supported by dnsmasq as well.
>> > I haven't tested it myself yet but you can try if you are brave.
>> I folded in the same patches as were used in 2.66-test3.
>> A good default configuration for cero would be good, Not sure what that
>> > I will try to make a table about the RFC requirements for Customer Edge
>> > (CE)-Routers soon which sums up which requirements are fulfilled and
>> > which
>> > are still not implemented both for CeroWrt / OpenWrt with 6relayd and
>> > with
>> > dnsmasq as RA/DHCPv6-server.
>> > Cheers,
>> > Steven
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> > Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>> Dave Täht
>> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html
More information about the Cerowrt-devel