On 2-7-2013 14:08, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: > I've been trying for many months to make DHCPv6-PD work reliably over PPPoE, > but i haven't got any positive result until now. > Besides that, i find confusing a lot of IPv6 options in the GUI. > Other than that, Dual-Stack seems to work fine.
The DHCP6 renewal still seems to be biting us which is being looked at. What is confusing about the IPv6 options? Do you mean that the label or text is not describing or explaining it well? Kind regards, Seth > > -- > Tassos > > Nick Buraglio wrote on 01/07/2013 20:10: >> I've worked pretty extensively with pfSense since it's early alpha >> days and have had private builds with IPv6 for years and years. It >> works well under 2.1-BETA and has supported DHCPv6-PD for a while on >> the WAN side. I've been using the 2.1-BETA train in production for >> a very long time with good results but I don't believe the IPv6 DNS is >> assigned via IPv4, it doesn't exist in the IPv4 lease tracking file >> and hacking through the interface code briefly it looks like there is >> mechanism for obtaining the DNS via DHCPv6 on the WAN side. This is >> further strengthened by the fact that I have correct ISP assigned IPv6 >> name servers assigned to me and they exist in the places I expect >> based on that code. >> >> nb >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Eugen Leitl <eu...@leitl.org> wrote: >>> ----- Forwarded message from Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> ----- >>> >>> Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 18:39:13 +0200 >>> From: Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> >>> To: l...@lists.pfsense.org >>> Subject: Re: [pfSense] IPv6 Routing in pfSense >>> Organization: SEACOM >>> User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.37.6-24-desktop; KDE/4.6.0; i686; ; ) >>> Reply-To: mark.ti...@seacom.mu, pfSense support and discussion >>> <l...@lists.pfsense.org> >>> >>> On Monday, July 01, 2013 06:23:03 PM Jim Pingle wrote: >>> >>>> Sure. A purely routed IPv6 setup was one of the first >>>> things to work well on 2.1. >>>> >>>> We do not do any NAT on IPv6 by default, there is NPt if >>>> someone really needs to do that, but it's all manual. >>>> >>>> And the settings for IPv4 and IPv6 are independent, you >>>> can do NAT on IPv4 while routing IPv6. >>> Excellent, Jim! >>> >>> Looking forward to 2.1. >>> >>> I suppose the other thing I'll then be thinking about is how >>> end-users are assigned IPv6 address information. >>> >>> Typical deployments have tended to use SLAAC with DHCPv4 for >>> the DNS. I've previously done SLAAC with DHCPv6 for DNS. >>> >From what I can see on doc.pfsense.org, I see pfSense will >>> support stateful address assignments using DHCPv6, in >>> addition to SLAAC. >>> >>> Would you be able to confirm whether 2.1 or later will >>> support DNS via DHCPv6 as well, as well as DHCP-PD? >>> >>> I suppose, for now, the default gateway will need to be >>> assigned via SLAAC, the one thing about DHCPv6 I still don't >>> find amusing. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Mark. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> List mailing list >>> l...@lists.pfsense.org >>> http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list >>> >>> >>> ----- End forwarded message ----- >>> -- >>> Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org >>> ______________________________________________________________ >>> ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://ativel.com http://postbiota.org >>> AC894EC5: 38A5 5F46 A4FF 59B8 336B 47EE F46E 3489 AC89 4EC5 >
