56885201 (banned)Ain't Nothin' But A Hound Dawg join:2005-05-01 Dawg House 1 edit |
to whfsdude
Re: [IPv6] IPV6 Issuessaid by whfsdude:said by nightwalker:Windows7 has a built-in 6to4 support that seems to be available on-demand. Comcast support for ipv6 will assign you a physical IP and isn't available nationwide yet. 6to4 doesn't work behind NAT. I think you're thinking of Teredo here. Interesting. I am on a Windows XP PC behind a WNR1000v2-VC NAT router that is using the Comcast 6t04 relay, and IPv6 seems to be working just fine for me (with the MS Teredo explicitly disabled):
C:\>netsh int ipv6 show int
Querying active state...
Idx Met MTU State Name
--- ---- ----- ------------ -----
7 0 1500 Connected Local Area Connection
3 1 1280 Connected 6to4 Pseudo-Interface
2 1 1280 Connected Automatic Tunneling Pseudo-Interface
1 0 1500 Connected Loopback Pseudo-Interface
C:\>netsh int ipv6 show teredo
Teredo Parameters
---------------------------------------------
Type : default
Server Name : default
Client Refresh Interval : default
Client Port : default
State : offline
Error : none
C:\>netsh int ipv6 show addr
Querying active state...
Interface 7: Local Area Connection
Addr Type DAD State Valid Life Pref. Life Address
--------- ---------- ------------ ------------ -----------------------------
Temporary Preferred 37m11s 1m42s 2002:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:,,,
Temporary Deprecated 37m11s 0s 2002:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:,,,
Public Preferred 37m11s 27m11s 2002:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:,,,
Link Preferred infinite infinite fe80::XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:,,,
Interface 2: Automatic Tunneling Pseudo-Interface
Addr Type DAD State Valid Life Pref. Life Address
--------- ---------- ------------ ------------ -----------------------------
Link Preferred infinite infinite fe80::5efe:10.224.87.199
Link Preferred infinite infinite fe80::5efe:192.168.9.100
Interface 1: Loopback Pseudo-Interface
Addr Type DAD State Valid Life Pref. Life Address
--------- ---------- ------------ ------------ -----------------------------
Loopback Preferred infinite infinite ::1
Link Preferred infinite infinite fe80::1
C:\>tracert -6 ipv6.google.com
Tracing route to ipv6.l.google.com [2607:f8b0:4002:802::1012]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 2002:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:,,,
2 21 ms 21 ms 22 ms 2002:c058:6301::
3 22 ms 21 ms 21 ms ge-7-2-ur02.s3ndigital.ga.atlanta.comcast.net [2001:558:fe12:1::1]
4 26 ms 24 ms 22 ms xe-2-0-1-0-ar01.d1stonemtn.ga.atlanta.comcast.net [2001:558:140:22::1]
5 46 ms 43 ms 59 ms pos-2-14-0-0-cr01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f73d::1]
6 47 ms 46 ms 46 ms pos-1-0-0-0-pe01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f588::2]
7 34 ms 33 ms 31 ms 2001:559::382
8 59 ms 32 ms 31 ms 2001:4860::1:0:3f7
9 33 ms 57 ms 52 ms 2001:4860::1:0:5db
10 54 ms 67 ms 53 ms 2001:4860::1:0:489
11 107 ms 52 ms 52 ms 2001:4860:0:1::164
12 61 ms 52 ms 54 ms atl14s08-in-x12.1e100.net [2607:f8b0:4002:802::1012]
Trace complete.
|
|
34764170 (banned) join:2007-09-06 Etobicoke, ON |
34764170 (banned)
Member
2012-Jun-20 10:29 pm
said by 56885201:Interesting. I am on a Windows XP PC behind a WNR1000v2-VC NAT router that is using the Comcast 6t04 relay, and IPv6 seems to be working just fine for me (with the MS Teredo explicitly disabled): Your network setup is not setup as he described. It would if you have an IPv4 router (using NAT) with your IPv6 router sitting behind that or what is more common an individual host (Windows, an open source UNIX, etc.) host with a user wanting to use 6to4 through a router without IPv6 support and that will not work. |
|
56885201 (banned)Ain't Nothin' But A Hound Dawg join:2005-05-01 Dawg House |
56885201 (banned)
Member
2012-Jun-20 10:48 pm
said by 34764170:said by 56885201:Interesting. I am on a Windows XP PC behind a WNR1000v2-VC NAT router that is using the Comcast 6t04 relay, and IPv6 seems to be working just fine for me (with the MS Teredo explicitly disabled): Your network setup is not setup as he described. It would if you have an IPv4 router (using NAT) with your IPv6 router sitting behind that or what is more common an individual host (Windows, an open source UNIX, etc.) host with a user wanting to use 6to4 through a router without IPv6 support and that will not work. My post was in response to the statement below that in no way describes any particular network topology other than being behind a NAT router: said by whfsdude:6to4 doesn't work behind NAT. I think you're thinking of Teredo here. And, if you follow the post chain back, you will see that remark was a reply to another post that referenced the OP's network topology. The OP's network topology is very similar to mine (a NAT router using a 6to4 tunnel to reach Comcast's 6to4 relay). |
|
34764170 (banned) join:2007-09-06 Etobicoke, ON
1 recommendation |
34764170 (banned)
Member
2012-Jun-20 11:26 pm
said by 56885201:My post was in response to the statement below that in no way describes any particular network topology other than being behind a NAT router: said by whfsdude:6to4 doesn't work behind NAT. I think you're thinking of Teredo here. And, if you follow the post chain back, you will see that remark was a reply to another post that referenced the OP's network topology. The OP's network topology is very similar to mine (a NAT router using a 6to4 tunnel to reach Comcast's 6to4 relay). When he says "behind NAT" and also mentions Teredo that does imply a particular network topology and it is not as you have described. His post was in reference to a particular setup of 6to4 which is not how you have things setup. |
|
56885201 (banned)Ain't Nothin' But A Hound Dawg join:2005-05-01 Dawg House |
56885201 (banned)
Member
2012-Jun-21 2:09 am
said by 34764170:said by 56885201:My post was in response to the statement below that in no way describes any particular network topology other than being behind a NAT router: said by whfsdude:6to4 doesn't work behind NAT. I think you're thinking of Teredo here. And, if you follow the post chain back, you will see that remark was a reply to another post that referenced the OP's network topology. The OP's network topology is very similar to mine (a NAT router using a 6to4 tunnel to reach Comcast's 6to4 relay). When he says "behind NAT" and also mentions Teredo that does imply a particular network topology and it is not as you have described. His post was in reference to a particular setup of 6to4 which is not how you have things setup. You might want to consider going back and actually reading the posts in this thread, and see for yourself that the OP is running behind a NAT router with 6to4 enabled (just like me), and the OP's configuration is what this thread is about, not some imaginary network that only you see (and are discussing). FWIW, since you obviously overlooked that post (and probably won't bother to look again), the OP's problem was fixed by enabling 6to4 instead of using auto config in the router (because the OP's connection does not yet have native IPv6 enabled): said by Manco9:Again thanks for the replies everyone! After putting the router on 6to4 instead of auto-detect yesterday I haven't lost ipv6 connectivity. |
|
1 recommendation |
to NetDog
When is the Comcast speedtest site going to reflect the IPv6 change? |
|
whfsdude Premium Member join:2003-04-05 Washington, DC |
to 56885201
said by 56885201:Interesting. I am on a Windows XP PC behind a WNR1000v2-VC NAT router that is using the Comcast 6t04 relay, and IPv6 seems to be working just fine for me (with the MS Teredo explicitly disabled): I understand your router is doing 6to4 and announcing it (just like it would with ULA. or a unicast global). My point was more to the fact that the poster had said Windows was using the built in 6to4 adapter. This is where Windows itself open a 6to4 tunnel. This is incorrect as it cannot be done behind NAT which should probably be pointed out so others browsing don't go enable 6to4 behind their router. |
|
NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands Premium Member join:2004-06-24 The Boro Netgear CM500 Pace 5268AC TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
1 edit
1 recommendation |
to 34764170
said by 34764170:said by 56885201:My post was in response to the statement below that in no way describes any particular network topology other than being behind a NAT router: said by whfsdude:6to4 doesn't work behind NAT. I think you're thinking of Teredo here. And, if you follow the post chain back, you will see that remark was a reply to another post that referenced the OP's network topology. The OP's network topology is very similar to mine (a NAT router using a 6to4 tunnel to reach Comcast's 6to4 relay). When he says "behind NAT" and also mentions Teredo that does imply a particular network topology and it is not as you have described. His post was in reference to a particular setup of 6to4 which is not how you have things setup. I think that you and Coon Dawg are just arguing semantics. I see your theoretical point, but the point that Coon Dawg is trying to make is that the OP is indeed running behind a Netgear router that is using 6to4 (enabling 6to4 in the router is what fixed the problem that triggered this thread). |
|
56885201 (banned)Ain't Nothin' But A Hound Dawg join:2005-05-01 Dawg House
1 recommendation |
to whfsdude
said by whfsdude:said by 56885201:Interesting. I am on a Windows XP PC behind a WNR1000v2-VC NAT router that is using the Comcast 6t04 relay, and IPv6 seems to be working just fine for me (with the MS Teredo explicitly disabled): I understand your router is doing 6to4 and announcing it (just like it would with ULA. or a unicast global). My point was more to the fact that the poster had said Windows was using the built in 6to4 adapter. This is where Windows itself open a 6to4 tunnel. This is incorrect as it cannot be done behind NAT which should probably be pointed out so others browsing don't go enable 6to4 behind their router. Ahh, OK. Thank you for the clarification. |
|
|
|
to NetDog
Not sure if this is considered an issue or not but I used to get an IPv6 address that had a lease time of 4 days which is the same length as my IPv4 address. Now the past few days I'm only getting a 60 minute lease time for IPv6. Anyone else seeing that? |
|
whfsdude Premium Member join:2003-04-05 Washington, DC |
whfsdude
Premium Member
2012-Jun-30 2:15 pm
said by Mike Wolf:Not sure if this is considered an issue or not but I used to get an IPv6 address that had a lease time of 4 days which is the same length as my IPv4 address. Now the past few days I'm only getting a 60 minute lease time for IPv6. Anyone else seeing that? Not seeing this on my router. Are you seeing this on the router or directly plugged into the router? I ask because it could be your own router's DHCPv6 server broadcasting on the LAN. |
|
|
|
|
Mike Wolf |
anyone else seeing the lease time only being 60 minutes for the IPv6 where it used to be 4 days? |
|
EGThe wings of love Premium Member join:2006-11-18 Union, NJ |
EG
Premium Member
2012-Jul-4 11:56 pm
Yep. I am currently seeing that too Mike.. |
|
|
ok thanks. |
|
NetDog Premium Member join:2002-03-04 Hollywood, FL |
to Mike Wolf
said by Mike Wolf:anyone else seeing the lease time only being 60 minutes for the IPv6 where it used to be 4 days? I will work on correcting that, the IPv4 Address was changed back to 4 days so should the v6. |
|
|
I never saw the IPv4 address lease higher then 4 days so I'm not sure what it was changed back to. Thank you for fixing things. |
|