Dual Stack home network pros and cons

[RMerlin]

Rogers cable "direct" customers actually had IPv6 enabled before Teksavvy-on-Rogers customers did. So either TSI has independent control of IPv6 on their network, or (more likely) Rogers themselves chose when to grant IPv6 access to the TPIA's using their infrastructure.

TPIAs like TSI handle the routing. But IP allocation (like DHCP or PD) is done by the incumbent. So while TSI's network is already IPv6-ready, the incumbent still needs to handle the IP allocation part.

 

[Tech9]

testing their dual-stack

Testing Napoleon BBQ compatibility as we speak. Wired, CPU on 450°F and rising. Dual Stake processing is stable. Raccoon firewall enabled.

 

[john9527]

Asus didn`t immediately integrate my code into their own codebase, so you might possibly have had it before them.

A bit of history from the repo

Author: Eric Sauvageau <xxxx@lostrealm.ca> 2013-08-04 23:00:44
Committer: Eric Sauvageau <xxxx@lostrealm.ca> 2013-08-04 23:00:44
Parent: 9181072a27b4b6408c75457324eed77c172724ae (Implement dropped logging for DualWAN too)
Child: 921f5668902e8e0c3ced0c40c748ccd74a2007b9 (Allow outbound traffic when firewall is enabled)
Branches: 374.43_2-update, dev, remotes/origin/374.43_2-update, remotes/origin/DPI, remotes/origin/master, remotes/origin/miniupnpd, remotes/origin/sdk5100
Follows: 3.0.0.4.372.31
Precedes: 3.0.0.4.372.32-BETA3

Started implementing IPv6 firewall rules

 

[ZebMcKayhan]

Tried to get a public ipv4 from my isp recently but they wanted quite alot of money for it so I eventually rejected. They are however handing out publically routable ipv6 for free (sadly my infrastructure provider is not supporting it yet).
As time goes this will be an ever increasing problem for us all and eventually no isp will give out public ipv4 for free anymore (and some may even stop ipv4 support). How much would you be willing to pay for a public ipv4 when ipv6 are free?

With 386.4 Asus / @RMerlin Introduces the ip6tables NAT which means that stateful NAT66 is now possible.
A checkbox in the GUI to masquarade WAN data would be nice but the ipv6 community looks at this as an abomination, so I guess that won't happen, but nothing stops you from adding the rule yourselves.

On my AC86U I'm currently running ipv6 ULA (FDxx adresses) on my LAN which is NAT66 masquaraded to wireguard client.
No kernel messages in syslog yet after running acouple of days.

 

[dave14305]

With 386.4 Asus / @RMerlin Introduces the ip6tables NAT and RAW which means that stateful NAT66 is now possible.

Where did you hear this about NAT?

I might eventually look at implementing NAT6 to also intercept these, but that's a low priority at the moment due to the amount of work involved only in testing anything.

 

[ZebMcKayhan]

Where did you hear this about NAT?

I flashed the firmware and they were there. I have been looking for a way to get ipv6 over wireguard but ended up needing maquarading (not for any other reason than to get my lan to use a single wireguard ULA ip)

Wireguard - Session Manager - Discussion (2nd) thread

ahh should have mentioned that. Sorry bout that. I have used Windows Terminal and have tried Bitvise SSH client. Both have the same problem. Up and down arrows work but anything with backspace/del does not work which is weird. I highly recommend/use Xshell 7 (FREE for Personal use) with these...

www.snbforums.com

This would really be needed as ASUS is implementing wireguard ipv6 server with dynamic ipv6 (wg-dynamic is experimental, not released and maybee not even worked on anymore)

admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -V
ip6tables v1.4.15
admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -nvL POSTROUTING -t nat
Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 316 packets, 30600 bytes)
pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
5295  619K MASQUERADE  all      *      wg11    fdff:a37f:fa75:1::/64  ::/0               /* WireGuard 'client' */

386.3 response:

admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s fdff:a37f:fa75:1::/64 -o wg11 -j MASQUERADE -m comment --comment "WireGuard 'client'"
ip6tables v1.4.15: can't initialize ip6tables table `nat': Table does not exist (do you need to insmod?)
Perhaps ip6tables or your kernel needs to be upgraded.

 

[heysoundude]

I flashed the firmware and they were there. I have been looking for a way to get ipv6 over wireguard but ended up needing maquarading (not for any other reason than to get my lan to use a single wireguard ULA ip)

Wireguard - Session Manager - Discussion (2nd) thread

ahh should have mentioned that. Sorry bout that. I have used Windows Terminal and have tried Bitvise SSH client. Both have the same problem. Up and down arrows work but anything with backspace/del does not work which is weird. I highly recommend/use Xshell 7 (FREE for Personal use) with these...

www.snbforums.com

This would really be needed as ASUS is implementing wireguard ipv6 server with dynamic ipv6 (wg-dynamic is experimental, not released and maybee not even worked on anymore)

admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -V
ip6tables v1.4.15
admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -nvL POSTROUTING -t nat
Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 316 packets, 30600 bytes)
pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
5295  619K MASQUERADE  all      *      wg11    fdff:a37f:fa75:1::/64  ::/0               /* WireGuard 'client' */

386.3 response:

admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s fdff:a37f:fa75:1::/64 -o wg11 -j MASQUERADE -m comment --comment "WireGuard 'client'"
ip6tables v1.4.15: can't initialize ip6tables table `nat': Table does not exist (do you need to insmod?)
Perhaps ip6tables or your kernel needs to be upgraded.

Woah...I had to step away for a bit to deal with some unwell family members.
This may be the big deal good news that I've been waiting on, @ZebMcKayhan
Happy New Year Indeed!

 

[RMerlin]

I have been looking for a way to get ipv6 over wireguard

You could look at how Asus is implementing it (AFAIK they do support IPv6). While not the final code, the IPv6 portion may possibly already be implemented in the merged code.

asuswrt-merlin.ng/release/src/router/rc/wireguard.c at main · RMerl/asuswrt-merlin.ng

Third party firmware for Asus routers (newer codebase) - RMerl/asuswrt-merlin.ng

github.com

 

[ZebMcKayhan]

You could look at how Asus is implementing it (AFAIK they do support IPv6). While not the final code, the IPv6 portion may possibly already be implemented in the merged code.

asuswrt-merlin.ng/release/src/router/rc/wireguard.c at main · RMerl/asuswrt-merlin.ng

Third party firmware for Asus routers (newer codebase) - RMerl/asuswrt-merlin.ng

github.com

Thanks!

Looks like the same as I did (except that they have a more generous rule), good to know that the netfilter ipv6 nat implementation is not just some leftover code, but hopefully thoroughly tested by ASUS.

ret = is_valid_ip(tmp);
if (ret > 0)
    fprintf(fp, "%s -t nat -I POSTROUTING ! -s %s -o %s -j MASQUERADE\n",
           (ret > 1) ? "ip6tables" : "iptables", tmp, ifname);

It works great!

 

[learning_curve]

I flashed the firmware and they were there. I have been looking for a way to get ipv6 over wireguard but ended up needing maquarading (not for any other reason than to get my lan to use a single wireguard ULA ip)

Wireguard - Session Manager - Discussion (2nd) thread

ahh should have mentioned that. Sorry bout that. I have used Windows Terminal and have tried Bitvise SSH client. Both have the same problem. Up and down arrows work but anything with backspace/del does not work which is weird. I highly recommend/use Xshell 7 (FREE for Personal use) with these...

www.snbforums.com

This would really be needed as ASUS is implementing wireguard ipv6 server with dynamic ipv6 (wg-dynamic is experimental, not released and maybee not even worked on anymore)

admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -V
ip6tables v1.4.15
admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -nvL POSTROUTING -t nat
Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 316 packets, 30600 bytes)
pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination
5295  619K MASQUERADE  all      *      wg11    fdff:a37f:fa75:1::/64  ::/0               /* WireGuard 'client' */

386.3 response:

admin@RT-AC86U-D7D8:/tmp/home/root# ip6tables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -s fdff:a37f:fa75:1::/64 -o wg11 -j MASQUERADE -m comment --comment "WireGuard 'client'"
ip6tables v1.4.15: can't initialize ip6tables table `nat': Table does not exist (do you need to insmod?)
Perhaps ip6tables or your kernel needs to be upgraded.

FWIW This ^^ handy update is NOT yet, present in the RT-AC68U 384 Firmware upgrade. The return value is unchanged from the previous 386.3 response that's been posted above.

Again just FWIW @ZebMcKayhan I've been able to successfully run IPv6 over Wireguard for some time now, but only at device level, not router level. Explained a little more my post HERE

 

[ZebMcKayhan]

FWIW This ^^ handy update is NOT yet, present in the RT-AC68U 384 Firmware upgrade. The return value is unchanged from the previous 386.3 response that's been posted above.

Is wireguard ipv6 implemented even in stock AC68U firmware? The older kernel might been a problem, or it will just come later.

Again just FWIW @ZebMcKayhan I've been able to successfully run IPv6 over Wireguard for some time now, but only at device level, not router level. Explained a little more my post HERE

Sounds like you found your solution then.

 

[learning_curve]

Is wireguard ipv6 implemented even in stock AC68U firmware? The older kernel might been a problem, or it will just come later.

Yep, you're right. Pretty sure it will be #OlderKernelSyndrome on my RT-AC68U - C1 that's the current issue It would be far better, if they update the kernel, instead of back-porting fixes

 

[coxhaus]

I will stay with IPv4 as I have a hard enough time protecting my network. I am not going to add in another failure point using IPv6.

 

[Yota]

For me, my personal opinion is very simple.

If my needs cannot be met with IPv4, then I will use IPv6.
If I can deal with the potential threat of IPv6 and have a complete understanding of the IPv6 stack and how to configure them on Asuswrt, then I will use IPv6.

Before that, I just limited the scope of IPv6 usage to specific applications (https://www.snbforums.com/threads/how-to-prevent-lan-devices-from-obtaining-ipv6-addresses.76285/).

This is not an anti-vaccination. If I don’t receive the vaccine, I might die, but if I don’t use IPv6, I may not lose anything.

In addition, this does not mean that I will not make progress. I am going to buy some books to enhance my understanding of IPv6. Once I have enough knowledge, I will be happy to use it, but are there any suggested books or reference materials before then?

 

[dave14305]

are there any suggested books or reference materials before then?

If you can stand them, the RFCs on IPv6 are a decent read.

The Top 10 IPv6 RFCs You Should Read (And Why) (Part 1 of 2)

IPv6 RFCs and their origin are a concept that is unfamiliar to many. Learn more about the top 10 IPv6 RFCs Infoblox advises your company's network to utilize.

blogs.infoblox.com

 

[Crimliar]

I doubt that once my ISP has IPv6 up and working, then I'll have no option other than to accept an IPv6 + IPv4 CG-NAT dual stack or leave for another ISP that will eventually do the exact same thing.

 

[Yota]

If you can stand them, the RFCs on IPv6 are a decent read.

The Top 10 IPv6 RFCs You Should Read (And Why) (Part 1 of 2)

IPv6 RFCs and their origin are a concept that is unfamiliar to many. Learn more about the top 10 IPv6 RFCs Infoblox advises your company's network to utilize.

blogs.infoblox.com

Haha, thanks, I will take the time to have a look.

 

[grogi]

I need IPv6 here in the US to connect to my parents network... Thankfully Comcast has native IPv6 so I am running full IPv6 and IPv4 here...
In Germany 1und1 only offers native IPv6 and does Carrier grade NAT for IPv4. I believe all new connections from T-Mobile are also IPv6 only....

I have DSL from 1und1 and I get both: full IPv4 and /56 prefix for IPv6. Pity that addresses are dynamic - changes each time the ISP connection is established.

 

[sfx2000]

The providers - there are still inconsistencies there - so what works with one carrier might not work with another...

after being away from direct exposure to AsusWRT - I can see why folks are somewhat resistant to IPv6... There are still bugs in the older non-HND Broadcom/Asus releases that have not been fixed, and these are service impacting bugs...

example - this bug is still present - from a post 2019 - ipv6 passthru with ctf... asus seems to be more focused on features, not on bug mashing...

fwiw - it's an easy fix, make exceptions for ipv6 traffic on CTF until/when broadcom makes a fix in their kernel driver...

May 9 12:35:09 kernel: osl_pktfastfree: free skb for NULL ctfpool
May 9 12:35:09 kernel: osl_pktfastfree: free skb for NULL ctfpool
May 9 12:35:09 kernel: osl_pktfastfree: free skb for NULL ctfpool

Not sure if this applies to HND, I only have an older RT-AC68U handy for the moment.

If people don't test, the bugs won't be reported, and they won't be fixed.

 

[sfx2000]

The router is in double NAT behind my ISP router, so IPv6 Passthrough configuration. OpenDNS IPv4 servers, OpenDNS IPv6 servers. The syslog was filled immediately with "kernel protocol 0800 is buggy", non-stop.

Didn't notice this one?

osl_pktfastfree: free skb for NULL ctfpool

TMHI with ipv6 passthru...