dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
10108
share rss forum feed


NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
·Comcast
reply to plencnerb

Re: [IPv6] Troubleshooting Comcast IPv6 (Start Here)

From the above results, it appears that you are using your pfSense box as your DNS server, and that is what is not working.

Try going into the TCPIP properties for the NIC in your PC, and try manually setting your DNS servers for 75.75.75.75 and 75.75.76.76 and see if that helps.

Your NIC setup won't look exactly like what you see below, but it should point you to where to look to change it.




If changing the DNS servers in the PC to point to Comcast fixes the issue, perhaps whfsdude will be able to reply with advice on how to fix your pfSense setup.
--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3

This is what pfsense is reporting for my DNS servers

75.75.75.75
75.75.76.76
2001:558:feed::1
2001:558:feed::2
 

I went and modified my NIC so that IPv4 had a hard-coded DNS of the first two, and IPv6 had a hard-coded DNS of the second two.

Did an ipconfig/release and then ipconfig/renew, and re-tested. Got the same results, except that the address of the DNS server is the primary one that I put on the NIC for IPv6.

C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>nslookup www.comcast.net
DNS request timed out.
    timeout was 2 seconds.
Server:  UnKnown
Address:  2001:558:feed::1
 
DNS request timed out.
    timeout was 2 seconds.
DNS request timed out.
    timeout was 2 seconds.
DNS request timed out.
    timeout was 2 seconds.
DNS request timed out.
    timeout was 2 seconds.
*** Request to UnKnown timed-out
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 

I think at this point, I wonder if I should start a new thread for this, as it is more a pfsense issue, then a comcast issue. I would hate to "muddy the waters" so to speak as I know that IPv6 is working in my area, and does work when I plug my desktop directly into the cable modem.

--Brian

--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail


NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
·Comcast

said by plencnerb:

I think at this point, I wonder if I should start a new thread for this, as it is more a pfsense issue, then a comcast issue. I would hate to "muddy the waters" so to speak as I know that IPv6 is working in my area, and does work when I plug my desktop directly into the cable modem.

--Brian

Personally, a new thread just for my problem would be my choice; simultaneous sub threads with different sub topics are always somewhat difficult to navigate.

While having a known starting place to discuss Comcast IPv6 problems is a good idea, at some point there is going to be a problem when multiple users are trying to resolve multiple unrelated problems. Perhaps NetDog See Profile will post some guidelines/rules for this new semi-sticky thread.
--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to NetDog

I can still reach your PC.

traceroute6 to 2601:d:4c00:68:34c8:339c:31d4:729b (2601:d:4c00:68:34c8:339c:31d4:729b) from 2001:559::85:d07f:b7d1:7f6c:8da9, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets
 1  2001:559:0:85::1  0.948 ms  0.850 ms  0.866 ms
 2  2001:559:0:84::1  1.397 ms  1.349 ms  1.179 ms
 3  ae-19-0-ar04.capitolhghts.md.bad.comcast.net  1.754 ms  1.617 ms  1.545 ms
 4  pos-5-7-0-0-cr01.ashburn.va.ibone.comcast.net  4.705 ms
    pos-5-4-0-0-cr01.ashburn.va.ibone.comcast.net  5.994 ms
    pos-5-1-0-0-cr01.ashburn.va.ibone.comcast.net  5.257 ms
 5  he-0-15-0-0-cr01.newyork.ny.ibone.comcast.net  18.379 ms  11.905 ms  11.755 ms
 6  he-0-3-0-0-cr01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net  30.388 ms  38.303 ms  33.282 ms
 7  he-2-11-0-0-ar01.area4.il.chicago.comcast.net  41.233 ms  40.682 ms  35.917 ms
 8  te-3-3-ur04.algonquin.il.chicago.comcast.net  33.539 ms  32.581 ms  32.167 ms
 9  2001:558:322:265::2  44.274 ms  36.339 ms  42.821 ms
10  2001:558:6033:ad:3449:6c62:49bb:d73e  41.354 ms  55.599 ms  41.589 ms
11  2601:d:4c00:68:34c8:339c:31d4:729b  41.038 ms  41.742 ms  41.942 ms
 

I can still reach you. So I'm still thinking DNS but it could be something else I guess. Do you have any weird proxy software on the box?


NetDog
Premium,VIP
join:2002-03-04
Parker, CO
kudos:77
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to NetFixer

said by NetFixer:

said by plencnerb:

I think at this point, I wonder if I should start a new thread for this, as it is more a pfsense issue, then a comcast issue. I would hate to "muddy the waters" so to speak as I know that IPv6 is working in my area, and does work when I plug my desktop directly into the cable modem.

--Brian

Personally, a new thread just for my problem would be my choice; simultaneous sub threads with different sub topics are always somewhat difficult to navigate.

While having a known starting place to discuss Comcast IPv6 problems is a good idea, at some point there is going to be a problem when multiple users are trying to resolve multiple unrelated problems. Perhaps NetDog See Profile will post some guidelines/rules for this new semi-sticky thread.

Maybe we do a troubleshooting post for each device? I am up for whatever, I was just looking for a way that new users could get an idea of where to start.


NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
·Comcast

1 edit

said by NetDog:

Maybe we do a troubleshooting post for each device? I am up for whatever, I was just looking for a way that new users could get an idea of where to start.

I don't know what the solution will be (and I do think that a common starting place for Comcast IPv6 related problems is a good idea). However, already in plencnerb's sub thread (in which I have been participating) in this thread, there have been replies that were meant for plencnerb, but were actually addressed to you. Imagine the confusion factor if there were a half dozen totally unrelated active sub threads.

A forum moderator can be asked to separate sub thread elements into a new thread, but when posters reply to the thread instead of to individual posts (or posters), that complicates the job of extracting and collating those sub thread posts, and it could be a PITA if a moderator needed to do that on a regular basis (I know because I have had to do it for other forums/message boards).

EDIT:
While on the subject of multiple sub threads I have a curiosity question regarding IPv6 support for the Comcast/Netgear WNR1000v2-VC. That router was originally on Comcast's IPv6 approved gateway device list, but was subsequently withdrawn. Was that because it snags a /64 for its WAN interface, and also randomly changes its LAN PD prefix? And are Comcast/Netgear planning a firmware upgrade to address that?
--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3
reply to NetDog

I do agree it can get confusing. Right now, its just my issue with pfsense, so it is fairly easy to follow. But, what if there was 3 or 4 different users posting different questions with different hardware. It would then be hard to follow, and to make sure that a reply was directed to the right post.

The idea that Netdog came up with is a good one. He has a LOT of wonderful information in that first post. The difficult part, I feel, comes down to where we are with my issues: Troubleshooting what is wrong, and working the problem to resolution. At that point, it does become router specific, as far as getting the right settings / configuration in place. Of course, you add in the complexity of differences in OS, and potential changes that we, as end users make to the OS to fit our environment.

I don't know how one would manage it, but if there was a way to have a separate post in this thread for a given router, and its settings. For example, whfsdude See Profile has it working currently on his pfsense box. He could document the changes he had to make to get it working, and add the steps he went through. The same could be done for a given Netgear router, Linksys router, etc. Then, as people read this thread, they see the first post, and then future posts for a specific hardware type.

Then, if there are questions, a new thread could be started.

In my case, I would have started a new thread after performing the steps I read here (connect pc directly to cable modem, verify I got the proper IPv6 info, and so on), then look at the post for pfsense, make the modifications, and see if I get the results posted. Since I did not, I could then open a new thread for the discussion, troubleshooting, and resolution.

If a given hardware type was not listed....not sure if it would be best to add to this existing thread, or start a new one, and then put the end results in this thread. In that case, maybe the first person to use that given hardware could "step up" so to speak to put together the post to be added here, showing the settings that had to be modified to get IPv6 to work for a given hardware device.

Regardless of how its done, I do see a lot of manual monitoring and work for a forum moderator to keep things in order. Almost like building a FAQ for IPv6.

So, not sure what the best answer is on this.

To answer whfsdude See Profile's question

said by whfsdude:

I can still reach you. So I'm still thinking DNS but it could be something else I guess. Do you have any weird proxy software on the box?

As far as I know, I don't have any odd proxy software installed on my system. To verify it's not me, I did switch hard drives and boot into Windows 8 Pro, and I get the same results.

I do think its a DNS issue, but I'm not sure if it is something to do with DNS in pfsense, or if it has to do with DNS from Comcast.

To rule out DNS on Comcast's side, I could go back to having my desktop plugged directly into the cable modem, and run a few quick tests and see what comes back (full ipconfig info, tracerts, pings, and ipv6 tests), and the post those results, so we can compare them to when I am behind pfsense, and try to figure out what may be different.

--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail


NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
·Comcast

2 edits

said by plencnerb:

I do think its a DNS issue, but I'm not sure if it is something to do with DNS in pfsense, or if it has to do with DNS from Comcast.

To rule out DNS on Comcast's side, I could go back to having my desktop plugged directly into the cable modem, and run a few quick tests and see what comes back (full ipconfig info, tracerts, pings, and ipv6 tests), and the post those results, so we can compare them to when I am behind pfsense, and try to figure out what may be different.

Another way to rule out DNS is to not use DNS. Try pings and traceroutes to my Windows and Linux server IPv6 hostnames and IPv6 addresses as shown below.


C:\>ping ipv6.dcsenterprises.net
 
Pinging ipv6-dcs-srv.dyndns-ip.com [2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac] with 32 bytes of data:
 
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=20ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=17ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=19ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=18ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 20ms, Average = 18ms
 
C:\>ping ipv6.dcs-net.net
 
Pinging ipv6-webhost.dyndns-ip.com [2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879] with 32 bytes of data:
 
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=21ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=18ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=21ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=19ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 18ms, Maximum = 21ms, Average = 19ms
 
C:\>ping 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Pinging 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac with 32 bytes of data:
 
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=36ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=35ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=20ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=18ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 18ms, Maximum = 36ms, Average = 27ms
 
C:\>ping 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Pinging 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879 with 32 bytes of data:
 
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=19ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=18ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=23ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=17ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 23ms, Average = 19ms
 
C:\>tracert 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Tracing route to 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac over a maximum of 30 hops
 
  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  2601:5:c80:6b:a221:b7ff:fe9c:602
  2    31 ms    28 ms    29 ms  2001:558:4013:19::1
  3    20 ms    17 ms    19 ms  2001:558:6016:19:39d6:46d1:4004:e738
  4    21 ms    18 ms    18 ms  2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Trace complete.
 
C:\>tracert 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Tracing route to 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879 over a maximum of 30 hops
 
  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  2601:5:c80:6b:a221:b7ff:fe9c:602
  2    24 ms    66 ms    32 ms  2001:558:4013:19::1
  3    22 ms    18 ms    18 ms  2001:558:6016:19:39d6:46d1:4004:e738
  4    29 ms    18 ms    19 ms  2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Trace complete.
 


FWIW, the above example was done from a Windows XP notebook attached to my guest Netgear router. It has no connectivity to my local network, so there is no possibility that the results shown above are actually some backdoor local connection (as would be the case if I had done this test from a PC connected to my LAN). The Netgear router does share a common physical connection through my cable modem with my other two routers and the WAN interfaces for my two servers, but being on different IPv4 and IPv6 subnets prevents any direct local communication. A graphic diagram of my network can be viewed here: »www.dcs-net.net/image/DCS-networ···gram.gif if that might help in understanding the conditions of the above test.

--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3

Good suggestion.

However, things don't appear to be working, per my results below.

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Pinging 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Pinging 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879 with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping ipv6.dcsenterprises.net
 
Pinging ipv6-dcs-srv.dyndns-ip.com [2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping ipv6.dcs-net.net
 
Pinging ipv6-webhost.dyndns-ip.com [2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>tracert 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Tracing route to 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac over a maximum of 30 hops
 
  1     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  2  ^C
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 
 

What I will do at some point tomorrow is put together a series of tests that I want to run while connected directly to my cable modem (avoiding my pfsense box). Not sure on that full list yet, but it will of course include doing a similar test to what I did above, along with a few other things (running a test at both comcast's and the standard ipv6 web site tests, trace routes to google's IPv6 site, and so on).

Something tells me that I have something not configured correctly with pfsense. However, before I make that call, I want to test without it, to make sure everything is as it should be on my end.

Thanks again to everyone who has helped so far.

--Brian

--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail


NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
·Comcast

FWIW, just in case you don't already know it, the fact that the pings to my IPv6 hostnames returned the correct IP addresses (and the CNAME DynDNS aliases) indicates that your DNS is working. It would seem that the problem is with the IPv6 transport (and as you said, probably in the pfSense box).
--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.



plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3

Right I noticed that too. If DNS was not working, when I put in your hostname, I would not get back any IP.

So, the problem's not DNS, but maybe something else in regards to pfsense.

I did put together a list of 12 steps that I'm going to run through tomorrow (well..later today, as its 1:30 AM! ) in regards to being directly connected to my modem. Once I do that, I'll report back with my results and then we can go from there.

--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail



plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3

Click for full size
Picture #1
Click for full size
Picture #2
Click for full size
Picture #3
I went ahead and tested without the pfsense box. As you can of course see by the above three pictures, things are looking better already! :)

So, just so we are all on the same page, here are the steps that I did.

First, I set things up to get ready for testing, by doing the following items

• power off the pfsense box
• power off my desktop
• unpluged lan cable between desktop and switch
• reboot cable modem
• plug lan cable from my desktop directly into cable modem
• power up my desktop

Once that was complete, I ran an "ipconfig/all". Those results are below

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ipconfig /all
 
Windows IP Configuration
 
   Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : BRIAN-DESKTOP
   Primary Dns Suffix  . . . . . . . :
   Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid
   IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
   WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
   DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hsd1.il.comcast.net.
 
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
 
   Connection-specific DNS Suffix  . : hsd1.il.comcast.net.
   Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller
   Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : F4-6D-04-F0-32-43
   DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
   Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
   IPv6 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 2001:558:6033:ad:18b2:dcdb:2418:a1ad(Preferred)
   Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Monday, December 10, 2012 6:34:58 AM
   Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, December 14, 2012 6:34:57 AM
   Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::34c8:339c:31d4:729b%11(Preferred)
   IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 67.184.208.11(Preferred)
   Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.252.0
   Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Monday, December 10, 2012 6:34:55 AM
   Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Monday, December 10, 2012 7:31:16 AM
   Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : fe80::201:5cff:fe3d:4e41%11
                                       67.184.208.1
   DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 69.252.202.7
   DHCPv6 IAID . . . . . . . . . . . : 250899716
   DHCPv6 Client DUID. . . . . . . . : 00-01-00-01-18-26-E4-53-F4-6D-04-F0-32-43
   DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 2001:558:feed::1
                                       2001:558:feed::2
                                       75.75.75.75
                                       75.75.76.76
   NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
 
Tunnel adapter isatap.hsd1.il.comcast.net.:
 
   Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
   Connection-specific DNS Suffix  . : hsd1.il.comcast.net.
   Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Microsoft ISATAP Adapter
   Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-E0
   DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
   Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
 
Tunnel adapter Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface:
 
   Connection-specific DNS Suffix  . :
   Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface
   Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-E0
   DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
   Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
   IPv6 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 2001:0:9d38:953c:4b:3355:bc47:2ff4(Preferred)
   Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::4b:3355:bc47:2ff4%13(Preferred)
   Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
   NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Disabled
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 
 

Next, I ran the following command: "netsh int ipv6 show addr"

 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>netsh int ipv6 show addr
 
Interface 1: Loopback Pseudo-Interface 1
 
Addr Type  DAD State   Valid Life Pref. Life Address
---------  ----------- ---------- ---------- ------------------------
Other      Preferred     infinite   infinite ::1
 
Interface 12: isatap.hsd1.il.comcast.net.
 
Addr Type  DAD State   Valid Life Pref. Life Address
---------  ----------- ---------- ---------- ------------------------
Other      Deprecated    infinite   infinite fe80::200:5efe:67.184.208.11%12
 
Interface 13: Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface
 
Addr Type  DAD State   Valid Life Pref. Life Address
---------  ----------- ---------- ---------- ------------------------
Public     Preferred     infinite   infinite 2001:0:9d38:953c:4b:3355:bc47:2ff4
Other      Preferred     infinite   infinite fe80::4b:3355:bc47:2ff4%13
 
Interface 11: Local Area Connection
 
Addr Type  DAD State   Valid Life Pref. Life Address
---------  ----------- ---------- ---------- ------------------------
Dhcp       Preferred     3d23h59m   3d23h59m 2001:558:6033:ad:18b2:dcdb:2418:a1ad
Other      Preferred     infinite   infinite fe80::34c8:339c:31d4:729b%11
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 

So far, things were looking good.

Then, using Waterfox (which, is the browser I have used all along), I went to the following three web pages

•»test-ipv6.com/
•»test-ipv6.comcast.net/
•»ipv6.speedtest.comcast.net/

The results of these are shown above as Picture #1, #2, and #3, respectability.

As a final verification, I ran some more tests from the command prompt.

nslookup commands

 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>nslookup www.comcast.net
Server:  cdns01.comcast.net
Address:  2001:558:feed::1
 
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    a1526.dscg.akamai.net
Addresses:  2001:559:0:5d::1743:3d3b
          2001:559:0:5d::1743:3d39
          96.17.77.66
          96.17.77.42
Aliases:  www.comcast.net
          www.comcast.net.edgesuite.net
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>nslookup -type=AAAA www.comcast.net
Server:  cdns01.comcast.net
Address:  2001:558:feed::1
 
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    a1526.dscg.akamai.net
Addresses:  2001:559:0:5d::1743:3d39
          2001:559:0:5d::1743:3d3b
Aliases:  www.comcast.net
          www.comcast.net.edgesuite.net
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>nslookup www.google.com
Server:  cdns01.comcast.net
Address:  2001:558:feed::1
 
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    www.google.com
Addresses:  2607:f8b0:400f:801::1011
          74.125.225.208
          74.125.225.211
          74.125.225.209
          74.125.225.210
          74.125.225.212
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>nslookup -type=AAAA www.google.com
Server:  cdns01.comcast.net
Address:  2001:558:feed::1
 
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    www.google.com
Address:  2607:f8b0:400f:801::1012
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 
 

ping commands

 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping ipv6.dcsenterprises.net
 
Pinging ipv6-dcs-srv.dyndns-ip.com [2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=41ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=37ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=35ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=36ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 35ms, Maximum = 41ms, Average = 37ms
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping ipv6.dcs-net.net
 
Pinging ipv6-webhost.dyndns-ip.com [2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=47ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=43ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=45ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=44ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 43ms, Maximum = 47ms, Average = 44ms
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Pinging 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=34ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=35ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=36ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac: time=36ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 36ms, Average = 35ms
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>ping 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Pinging 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=43ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=42ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=42ms
Reply from 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879: time=43ms
 
Ping statistics for 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 42ms, Maximum = 43ms, Average = 42ms
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 
 

And then finally, a few trace commands. I did mix both IPv4 and IPv6 sites in this, just to be complete.

 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>tracert 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Tracing route to 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac over a maximum of 30 hops
 
  1    37 ms    30 ms    29 ms  2001:558:6033:ad::1
  2     9 ms     8 ms     9 ms  te-9-1-ur04.algonquin.il.chicago.comcast.net [2001:558:322:26f::1]
  3    15 ms    15 ms    15 ms  te-0-3-0-0-ar01.area4.il.chicago.comcast.net [2001:558:300:1e::1]
  4    19 ms    23 ms    23 ms  he-3-5-0-0-cr01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f7fb::1]
  5    25 ms    25 ms    26 ms  so-7-1-0-0-ar03.nashville.tn.nash.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f7f4::2]
  6    27 ms    26 ms    28 ms  xe-0-1-0-0-sur01.murfreesboro.tn.nash.comcast.net [2001:558:160:57::2]
  7    39 ms    34 ms    27 ms  2001:558:162:32::2
  8    36 ms    35 ms    37 ms  2001:558:6016:19:39d6:46d1:4004:e738
  9    37 ms    35 ms    38 ms  2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:beac
 
Trace complete.
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>tracert 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Tracing route to 2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879 over a maximum of 30 hops
 
  1    27 ms    29 ms    24 ms  2001:558:6033:ad::1
  2    24 ms     9 ms     9 ms  te-9-1-ur04.algonquin.il.chicago.comcast.net [2001:558:322:26f::1]
  3    16 ms    15 ms    15 ms  te-0-3-0-2-ar01.area4.il.chicago.comcast.net [2001:558:300:283::1]
  4    25 ms    23 ms    23 ms  he-3-11-0-0-cr01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f683::1]
  5    93 ms    25 ms    27 ms  so-0-1-0-0-ar03.nashville.tn.nash.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f692::2]
  6    27 ms    28 ms    27 ms  2001:558:160:94::2
  7    43 ms    36 ms    41 ms  2001:558:162:32::2
  8    33 ms    37 ms    36 ms  2001:558:6016:19:39d6:46d1:4004:e738
  9    44 ms    44 ms    41 ms  2601:5:c80:91:e291:f5ff:fe95:a879
 
Trace complete.
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>tracert www.google.com
 
Tracing route to www.google.com [2607:f8b0:400f:801::1013]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1    27 ms    29 ms    29 ms  2001:558:6033:ad::1
  2     9 ms     9 ms    10 ms  te-9-1-ur04.algonquin.il.chicago.comcast.net [2001:558:322:26f::1]
  3    16 ms    16 ms    14 ms  te-0-3-0-3-ar01.area4.il.chicago.comcast.net [2001:558:300:286::1]
  4    22 ms    23 ms    17 ms  he-3-7-0-0-cr01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f68d::1]
  5    14 ms    13 ms    13 ms  pos-1-2-0-0-pe01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [2001:558:0:f593::2]
  6    59 ms    13 ms    12 ms  2001:559::44a
  7    13 ms    13 ms    13 ms  2001:4860::1:0:92e
  8    14 ms    13 ms    13 ms  2001:4860::8:0:2fe9
  9    35 ms    37 ms    36 ms  2001:4860::8:0:281d
 10    36 ms    33 ms    33 ms  2001:4860::8:0:3426
 11    34 ms    34 ms    43 ms  2001:4860::1:0:7a4
 12    35 ms    38 ms    36 ms  2001:4860:0:1::593
 13    34 ms    35 ms    35 ms  den03s06-in-x13.1e100.net [2607:f8b0:400f:801::1013]
 
Trace complete.
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>tracert www.dslreports.com
 
Tracing route to www.dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1    31 ms    22 ms    27 ms  67.184.208.1
  2    29 ms    15 ms    16 ms  te-9-1-ur04.algonquin.il.chicago.comcast.net [68.87.229.189]
  3    15 ms    15 ms    15 ms  te-0-3-0-2-ar01.area4.il.chicago.comcast.net [68.86.189.229]
  4    14 ms    23 ms    11 ms  he-3-8-0-0-cr01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.90.49]
  5    40 ms    35 ms    35 ms  he-4-6-0-0-cr01.newyork.ny.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.88.153]
  6    41 ms    33 ms    40 ms  173.167.58.26
  7    34 ms    33 ms    32 ms  0.e1-4.tbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.10.122]
  8    35 ms    34 ms    32 ms  vlan804.esd1.oct.nac.net [209.123.10.2]
  9    34 ms    32 ms    32 ms  www.dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
 
Trace complete.
 
C:\Users\Brian A. Plencner>
 

So, my final observation here is that IPv6 is working (as best as I can tell) exactly the way it should be when I am directly connected to my cable modem. This then points me to the fact that the issue is with pfsense.

As far as I know, the only changes that I have made from a "default" install were the ones told to me in this thread. However, I have no problem re-installing pfsense just to make sure something strange did not get set or configured by mistake.

NetDog See Profile and NetFixer See Profile: How do things look from your end? I take it everything looks as it should?

whfsdude See Profile: Any ideas or suggestions of things I should look at or verify as far as pfsense goes? Do you think I should re-install pfsense and start over?

--Brian

--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail


graysonf
Premium,MVM
join:1999-07-16
Fort Lauderdale, FL
kudos:1

Completely reinstalling pfsense is unnecessary if you want to attempt starting over with it. Just reset it to the default configuration.

If you haven't already done so, you should post how you have configured pfsense for Comcast native IPv6. The pfsense forum is also a good source of information.

I don't run pfsense here myself, it offers way more than I need. I do run m0n0wall, which was forked years ago to start the pfsense project.

If you want to try that instead of pfsense, you'll find it much simpler to configure and use. But if you can verify that Comcast IPv6 works with m0n0wall, then it will work with the latest pfsense 2.1 snapshots.



ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA
reply to NetFixer

Maybe starting a new thread is the best idea and then maybe adding an entry here pointing to each new thread and giving a brief explanation of the issue?



plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3
reply to NetDog

I wanted to post here to inform everyone that I have started a new thread to troubleshoot the issues I'm having with pfsense.

Thanks to everyone who posted in this thread to get me where I am so far.

I know I will figure it out!

--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail



Mike Wolf

join:2009-05-24
Beachwood, NJ
kudos:3

but what about all the previous posts already on this thread?



NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
·Comcast

said by Mike Wolf:

but what about all the previous posts already on this thread?

Are you volunteering to map all of those fragmented sub thread posts into plencnerb's new thread?
--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


Mike Wolf

join:2009-05-24
Beachwood, NJ
kudos:3

I've considered it but I don't have enough patience :P I'm just a cranky old man.