[Cerowrt-devel] 6relayd
cb.list6
cb.list6 at gmail.com
Sun Jan 5 19:48:25 EST 2014
Confirmed. My issue is a Comcast issue. Enabling debug on odhcp6 shows
comcast dhcpv6 is not allocating a prefix to me in Seattle.
JJB at Comcast acknowledged the issue and it is being worked. That is all
know.
My issue is not a cerowrt issue, sorry for the noise
CB
On Jan 5, 2014 4:42 PM, "Matt Mathis" <mattmathis at google.com> wrote:
> Background: some time earlier this year Comcast started allocating IPv6
> addresses, and everything magically all worked (I know that real magic
> requires wizards to work very hard behind the scenes.)
>
> I was running the WNDR 3700, that we flashed at your (Dave's) place this
> summer (3.10.7-1).
>
> Sometime during the holidays IPv6 stopped working. I didn't notice it
> immediately, so I don't know if there should have been any obvious
> triggers. Note that both Comcast and my remotely managed clients
> (Android, etc) probably received updates in this window. LuCI
> status->overview indicates a /128 on the upstream interface but no /60 or
> /64 (although I now see that even with a global address block, this pages
> does not show it). From the router I can ping6 out.
>
> I have a spare 3700, which is now freshly flashed with cerowrt 3.10.24 #1
> Tue Dec 24 10:50:15 PST 2013. I installed the 6relay fix on it.
> My config is 100% vanilla except for SSIDs, pw's and the 6relay fix.
>
> Still no joy for my home devices (both WiFi and wired), however now
> ifconfig on the 3700 reports /64 subnets on all of its interfaces (and they
> appear in LuCi networks but not the status overview).
>
> 6relay does not seem to actually start anything, and odhcp6c is running,
> which feels a bit odd. Is this correct?
>
> Can you point me to the relevant RFCs? Actually an overview of IPv6
> address and router discovery would be most useful. The IPv6 versions of
> dhcp, arp, etc.
>
> I need IPv6 at home for some other unrelated server side debugging....
>
> 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 Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Steven Barth <cyrus at 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>> 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 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at 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 at 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 at 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 at cerowrt:/etc/config# uname -a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Cerowrt-devel at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/attachments/20140105/e9c573b9/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Cerowrt-devel
mailing list