dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
43
share rss forum feed


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON
reply to bthornhill

Re: IPv6 beta

All you need is a router than can handle IPv6 (most modern ones can). There is no "IPv6 gateway" or anything; it's all handled by your router.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
said by squircle:

All you need is a router than can handle IPv6 (most modern ones can). There is no "IPv6 gateway" or anything; it's all handled by your router.

I think in the context his use of IPv6 gateway is referring to a router, since you can't just plug a bridged modem into a switch like that.


bthornhill

join:2004-05-10
Yes, thats what I meant. I'm hoping that both devices will still maintain their IPv4 adddresses, because if it doesn't work, I need to be able to set the modem back to a router...


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON
They certainly will!


rodjames
Premium
join:2010-06-19
Gloucester, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·loclhost.ca
reply to squircle
I have a Tp-Link 2543nd flashed with OpenWRT. Works great on IPV6, but I haven't bothered doing 6hcp *lol* I just do static address and have fun with it. I also contrib to the wiki for this model on the openwrt site.

»wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-wr2543nd

great router, not bad on price. Get this model not the 743 though, you'll thank me.


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON
said by rodjames:

I have a Tp-Link 2543nd flashed with OpenWRT. Works great on IPV6, but I haven't bothered doing 6hcp *lol* I just do static address and have fun with it.

That implies there's an option other than static addressing right now...

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

said by squircle:

said by rodjames:

I have a Tp-Link 2543nd flashed with OpenWRT. Works great on IPV6, but I haven't bothered doing 6hcp *lol* I just do static address and have fun with it.

That implies there's an option other than static addressing right now...

On the WAN side.. yes. TSI is still dragging their feet on that.


rodjames
Premium
join:2010-06-19
Gloucester, ON
reply to squircle
There is. You take the range they gave you and dole out your own ip6 dhcp leases. easy.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
said by rodjames:

There is. You take the range they gave you and dole out your own ip6 dhcp leases. easy.

Or as the vast majority will use... use RA.


rodjames
Premium
join:2010-06-19
Gloucester, ON
yeah, easy.


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON

2 edits
reply to rodjames
said by rodjames:

There is. You take the range they gave you and dole out your own ip6 dhcp leases. easy.

Either you misunderstood me or I misunderstood you. What I was trying to say is that there isn't (edit: a currently implemented) way to automatically assign IPv6 ranges to CPE not that there isn't a way to automatically assign IPv6 addresses to clients behind IPv6-capable routers.

I'm sure most people use SLAAC over DHCPv6 for address assignment in their LAN (as 34764170 See Profile pointed out), but that still has to be manually configured. That's the point I was trying to make.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

said by squircle:

Either you misunderstood me or I misunderstood you. What I was trying to say is that there's no way to automatically assign IPv6 ranges to CPE not that there isn't a way to automatically assign IPv6 addresses to clients behind IPv6-capable routers.

Yes, TSI having DHCPv6-PD would allow for routers to be easily configured with minimal configuration by the user and it is relevant whether the user has a statically allocated /56 or one is allocated dynamically.


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON
said by 34764170:

Yes, TSI having DHCPv6-PD would allow for routers to be easily configured with minimal configuration by the user and it is relevant whether the user has a statically allocated /56 or one is allocated dynamically.

Again, I've failed at saying what I mean to say. Post edited.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
said by squircle:

said by 34764170:

Yes, TSI having DHCPv6-PD would allow for routers to be easily configured with minimal configuration by the user and it is relevant whether the user has a statically allocated /56 or one is allocated dynamically.

Again, I've failed at saying what I mean to say. Post edited.

That's why I said having since it is not implemented yet and they have been dragging their feet to do things properly.


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON
Glad we finally sorted that

I'm sure there are unique challenges in automatically assigning IPv6 ranges; I don't know that DHCP/v6 is particularly well suited to PPP* connections, but I don't know if there's a way to do block assignment through IPv6CP (reading RFC 5072 ATM). I'd assume that doing block assignment through IPv6CP would be preferred and easier to implement (piggyback off the existing IPCP configs), but I won't speak for Gabe.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 edit
said by squircle:

I'm sure there are unique challenges in automatically assigning IPv6 ranges; I don't know that DHCP/v6 is particularly well suited to PPP* connections, but I don't know if there's a way to do block assignment through IPv6CP (reading RFC 5072 ATM). I'd assume that doing block assignment through IPv6CP would be preferred and easier to implement (piggyback off the existing IPCP configs), but I won't speak for Gabe.

IPv6CP is only involved with the link-local address and that's it; unlike IPv4 it's not even involved for the global unicast address which is the same as an IPv4 address. Address configuration is quite different with IPv4 vs IPv6 with PPP. If you take a look at Appendix A in that RFC you'll see that you have to use either RA or DHCPv6 to assign a global unicast address to the PPP/PPPoE interface and the only mechanism for propagating a prefix is DHCPv6-PD.