<html><head></head><body>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.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Steven<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<br>
Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> schrieb:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Matt Mathis <mattmathis@google.com> wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">I'm finally getting back to this.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">Hmm. if you uncomment everything in /etc/dnsmasq.conf and restart<br />dnsmasq what happens? If you have got /64s you would end up doing<br />slaac and ra announcements via dnsmasq in this case.<br /><br />That was on by default before (and what was tested in feburary). Later<br />on 6relayd started having a race with it and seemed to be "the<br />future", so I disabled the dnsmasq version, thinking that 6relayd was<br />the answer. It's entirely possible that's<br />merely configured wrong.</blockquote><br /><br />Now I get global /64's on my LAN interfaces, but I am still not answering<br />dh
cp6 for
attached hosts. I retried both version of the 6relayd init<br />script....<br /><br />dnsmasq.conf contains:<br />enable-ra<br />dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:se00,ra-names,ra-stateless<br />dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:sw00,ra-names,ra-stateless<br />dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:gw00,ra-names,ra-stateless<br />dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:sw10,ra-names,ra-stateless<br />dhcp-range=::1,::400,constructor:gw10,ra-names,ra-stateless<br /><br /><br />I am running: Linux cerowrt 3.10.24 #1 Tue Dec 24 10:50:15 PST 2013.....<br />which might be just a bit too fresh.... Would you suggest another?</blockquote><br />You are not getting slaac either?<br /><br />An ifconfig on an interface and a packet dump of ipv6 packets would be<br />helpful.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">I have a spare 3700, so I think I will try some alternate vintages.<br /><br />Thanks,<br />--MM--<b
r />The
best way to predict the future is to create it. - Alan Kay<br /><br />Privacy matters! We know from recent events that people are using our<br />services to speak in defiance of unjust governments. We treat privacy and<br />security as matters of life and death, because for some users, they are.<br /><br /><br />On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org> wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">On 03.01.2014 19:43, Dave Taht wrote:<br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #fcaf3e; padding-left: 1ex;">I was also experiencing a race condition with dnsmasq, while I had it<br />enabling<br />ra
and
dhcpv6 via dnsmasq. At the moment that's turned off by default,<br />but<br />I did rather prefer having dns names for my ipv6 addresses...</blockquote><br />Well 6relayd and odhcpd collect hostnames of clients acquired via<br />stateful<br />DHCPv6 and export them to dnsmasq in an additional hostfiles. At least<br />that<br />seemed to work when I last tried it a few months ago. The only<br />disadvantage<br />is that there is no "ra-names" feature there.</blockquote><br />Getting to names from dhcpv4 to slaac was a neat hack and a potential<br />RFC. So i figure spending the time to add the same functionality into<br />into something other than dnsmasq would be useful towards writing that<br />rfc.<br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #fcaf3e; padding-left: 1ex;">is there a good way for 6re
layd
and dnsmasq-dhcpv6 to co-exist?</blockquote><br />Ideally they could coexist in a way that you could select dnsmasq and /<br />or<br />odhcpd for different interfaces on the same machine. odhcpd supports<br />that<br />but dnsmasq the last time I've looked seemed to use a single socket<br />binding<br />to all interfaces for DHCP/v6 which prevents coexistance from working<br />correctly because odhcpd / 6relayd can't bind the socket after dnsmasq<br />did<br />and vice versa.<br /><br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #fcaf3e; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #e9b96e; padding-left: 1ex;">Feel free to provide me with some debugging information of the system<br />while<br />PD fails for you so I can have a look at the probable cause:<br /><br />* "ifstatus ge00" (replace ge00 with your IPv6 upstream interface)<br />* "ip addr list dev
ge01"
(replace ge01 with the interface your<br />downstream<br />router is connected)<br />* "ps | grep 6relayd"<br /><br />Anyway I will migrate all the stuff to odhcpd soon (it's successor<br />which<br />shares a good part of the codebase but is a bit better integrated with<br />the<br />rest of the environment).</blockquote><br />same question re dnsmasq.</blockquote><br />Yeah as pointed out coexistence is a matter of binding sockets. odhcpd<br />will<br />bring the functionality of dynamically enabling / disabling DHCPv4/v6 on<br />interfaces without restarting the daemon and loosing state. This is one<br />of<br />the main reasons for the change and very much eases things for<br />high-level<br />protocols that do dynamic wan/lan detection.<br /><br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />Steven<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #fcaf3e; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="mar
gin:
0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #e9b96e; padding-left: 1ex;">Regards,<br /><br />Steven<br /><br /><br /><br />On 03.01.2014 18:31, Dave Taht wrote:<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1ex;">On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:50 AM, cb.list6 <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:<br /><br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1ex;">On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com><br />wrote:<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1ex;">At one level I am happy to figure out this is a recently introduced<br />bug.<br /><br />On the other hand I am not sure if it is 6relayd.<br /><br />What version of cero was working for you?</blockquote><br /><br />I am not entirely sure, but i think it was from September.<br /><br
/>CB</blockquote><br />At the moment I lack the ability to debug the breakage in ipv6<br />dhcp-pd<br />(which is odhcpd) (I am travelling).<br /><br />I will on my next stop next week (tuesday) setup a dhcpv6pd server<br />and<br />see what I can see.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1ex;">On Jan 3, 2014 12:21 AM, "cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ccc; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi,<br /><br />I have been using CeroWRT on Comcast with a 3800 for about 6<br />month.<br />The<br />DHCP-PD config has always been a little unstable for me, but<br />working.<br /><br />I recently upgraded to:<br /><br />root@cerowrt:/etc/config# uname -a<br />Linux cerowrt 3.10.24 #1 Tue Dec 24 1
0:50:15
PST 2013 mips<br />GNU/Linux<br /><br />My WAN gets a /128, but i cannot get DHCP-PD to work to get<br />addresses<br />on<br />the rest of my interfaces. The router does seem to have good IPv6<br />access.<br /><br /><br />I fiddled with the 6relayd config and came up with this, but it<br />does<br />not<br />work. Any pointers on how to get this back on track? The result<br />of<br />the<br />below config is that the /128 from the WAN interfaces is now<br />present<br />on<br />all<br />the interfaces but my attached computers get no addresses.<br /><br /><br />config server 'default'<br />option rd 'server'<br />option dhcpv6 'server'<br />option management_level '1'<br />list network 'ge01'<br />list network 'gw00'<br />list network 'gw01'<br />list network 'gw10'<br />list network 'gw11'<br />list network 'se00'<br />list network 'sw00'<br />list network 'sw10'<br />option fallback_relay 'rd dhcpv6 ndp'<br />option master 'ge00'<br /><br />root@cerowrt:/etc/config# un
ame
-a<br /><br /><hr /><br />Cerowrt-devel mailing list<br />Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net<br /><a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a></blockquote><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>--<br />Dave Täht<br /><br />Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:<br /><a href="http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html">http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html</a></blockquote><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></blockquote>-- <br />Dave Täht<br /><br />Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: <a href="http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html">http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html</a><br /></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>