Open IPv6 Issues / questions

Hi Ben, please see my answers inline below:

Ben said:

- will the fix for issue NUTM-7187 be included with 9.5?

 [BL]: The fix for NUTM-7187 is not included in this current UTM 9.5 beta version. We are actively working on the fix right now though, so as soon as we have a confirmed fix it will be included in a subsequent release.

- is there a fix in the works for IPv6 Connections where the WAN Port is supposed to use an address out of the delegated prefix? Currently users of such ISPs do not get any IPv6 address. (for esxample KPN netherlands)

[BL]: This should be supported today, unless the ISP is doing both stateless & stateful. Is that the case for you? If so, we are fixing that as part of NUTM-7187 as well.

- what about the ability to change/edit the UID for IPv6 Delegation Requests?

[BL]: Unfortunately this isn't part of this 9.5 release.

- what about long standing feature requests such as 6tunnel integration, lets encrypt - is that on the roadmap? Users, myself included had high hopes for 9.5 but this seems to be more than a maintance release.

[BL]: Lets Encrypt is on our current roadmap, but it's mainly planned as a WAF feature. As for 6tunnel integration, it's currently not planned for any specific release.

 

thank you in advance.

 

Hi Bobby,

Normally the ISPs router will then request /48 prefix and use a /64 from that prefix for the wan interface and a /64for the lan interface. So there are no other global ipv6 addresses than the ones from that /48.

On the Sophos UTM, in my case I will only receive a link local IPv6 address via PPPoE. Using a tcpdump I have verified the UTM is not sending out a prefix request after the PPPoE has been established. Is it waiting for a advertised IPv6 address for the WAN interface first before it will do this? Because in this case it will never get it... And thus a IPv6 prefix will never be requested.

If you want to have a look at my Sophos VM, or need some tcpdumps of the PPPoE setup let me know!

Rene

Hi René,

Thanks for spending time verifying the fix and for your inputs.

FYI... A few other modules underwent IPv6 related fixes and code restructuring for 9.5 Beta (not just the ipv6_watchdog).

The problems you are seeing could be because of certain missing interdependencies (assuming you installed the latest 9.411 ipv6_watchdog fix over 9.5Beta).

If this is not the case, I will need to take a look at the packet capture (just before and after the pppoe interface is enabled) and also the logs from /var/log  to understand the problem in more detail. Would it be possible for you to provide us the same (via Sophos support maybe)?

However, it could be about a week or so before I can actually work on a fix again (sorry about that..)

Regards,

Prakash

i will test the patch with the 9.5 beta soon (tm), will report back on that also.

edit: test with 9.5 Beta, looking good so far.

sent you the patch earlier ago, please let us know if it works for you, 

works here on 9.4 (current) and 9.5 beta

Hi Prakash,

When referring to previous version in my last post I mean the previous patched persion. That showed the LL address, so i think it should work correclty in 9.5.

Regarding the missing default route. How is this generated in the watchdog script? Is it using the address of the RAs? In this case we don't have those and the default should point to the remote link local received via pppoe.

Thank you for all the work so far! If you are able to fix the default route creation I think my IPv6 is fully working! :)

Let me know if you still need some captures.

René

A little bit lost, is probably the correct term :+ I had it working for a few minutes, but somehow I've lost IPv6 connectivity and can't get it back... Even after a factory reset.

My first attempt when I got it working: clean 9.5 beta, installed the patch, restarted the watchdog service, enabled IPv6.
Enabled IPv6 Default Gateway on my WAN interface, added a static IPv6 address to my LAN interface, and created a Prefix Advertisement for my LAN.
I didn't create a new default route myself, it was added automatically. Client received an IPv6 address in my /64 range, and I was able to go to ipv6-test.com. (I did notice that my clients IPv6 address was actually the LAN's interface address, not the clients privacy extension address ??)
When checking under Interfaces, the WAN interface showed DEFAULT GW <IPv4> | fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530
For some reason it now only displays DEFAULT GW <IPv4> | :: 
Like it doesn't have a gateway anymore.

I forgot to write down some log/commands in my first attempt, so these are from my second attempt.
/var/log/ipv6.log
2017:04:19-23:15:15 router ipv6_watchdog[8749]: Installing default route via fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530 for interface ppp0(ifidx 12)

Seems fine to me.

ip -6 route
default via fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530 dev ppp0 proto ra metric 1024 expires 1578sec hoplimit 64

Seems also fine, the same LL address I got on my opnsense firewall.

Getting a little bit late now, so I will test again tomorrow.

I have not seen the "Installing default route" in my logs.

Attached are my PPPoE and IPv6 log files.

logfiles_20170420085819.zip

Checked my logs as well, and they are quite the same.

So.. I decided to start over. No factory reset yet, just config-wise.
Removed all my IPv6 settings on my interfaces, deleted Prefix for my LAN, disabled IPv6.
Re-applied the patch (I know, shouldn't matter), restarted the watchdog service, and reconnected the PPPoE connection.

Gave my LAN a static address 2001:981:9D6E:1::1
Re-created the Prefix Advertisement for my LAN.
Enabled the "IPv6 Default GW" on my WAN. (2017:04:20-12:10:38 router ipv6_watchdog[10859]: Installing default route via fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530 for interface ppp0(ifidx 19))
WAN interface shows: DEFAULT GW 194.109.5.175 | ::
After reconnecting the WAN: DEFAULT GW 194.109.5.175 | fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530

No working connection :(
So, why not try a reboot, solves everything right? Appearantly it does :O After a reboot I could imediately ping and surf to IPv6 hosts.

I saw something new in the ipv6.log: Started dhclient6 -P
Let's hope it keeps working now!
This is also in René's logfile, but I didn't see it in mine before. Attached are my ipv6.log and pppoe.log. Everything before 12:15 is before the reboot, and after 12.15 is after the reboot.

There is one thing I already noticed, my clients are using my LAN's address 2001:981:9D6E:1::1 as outgoing address. Is this expected behavior? Security wise? Or should a client always use their temporary privacy extension address? 

Logs.zip

I tried rebooting, disabling IPv6 etc. but no matter what I try I am not seeing the following lines in my log:

2017:04:20-12:18:18 router ipv6_watchdog[4332]: Installing default route via fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530 for interface ppp0(ifidx 10)
2017:04:20-12:18:18 router ipv6_watchdog[4332]: JSON "ppp0", "unknown", "up", { "gateway6": "fe80::2a0:a50f:fc78:5530", "network6":"1"}
2017:04:20-12:18:18 router ipv6_watchdog[4332]: RA flags changed for interface ppp0(ifidx 10): SENT,READY -> SENT,RCVD,READY

Somehow the creation of the default route does not work for me.

If you do a reconnect, will it keep working? 

You made me break my IPv6 :( :+
It was working untill I reconnected my PPPoE. A reboot didn't solve it this time, and right now deleting my IPv6 settings and re-applying them didn't solve it either. 
So.. eh, weird. Maybe more time this weekend.

i can only advice to record connects with tcpdump for later wireshark dissection, was able to find problems really fast through that. 

say your pppoe interface is eth1, 

# tcpdump -i eth1 pppoes and ip6 -v -w /home/login/eth1-pppoes-datestamp.pcap

i did that with all patches and before so i could see the changes.

edit: fixed a typo in the tcpdump, its "ip6" not "ipv6"

i can only advice to record connects with tcpdump for later wireshark dissection, was able to find problems really fast through that. 

say your pppoe interface is eth1, 

# tcpdump -i eth1 pppoes and ip6 -v -w /home/login/eth1-pppoes-datestamp.pcap

i did that with all patches and before so i could see the changes.

edit: fixed a typo in the tcpdump, its "ip6" not "ipv6"