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

thanks for the swift reply Prakash

Please feel free to install it on the sophos with the open ticket anytime. ill than copy it to my test machine aswell and report back here on both.

I have installed the fix (/root/fix-2.1/ep-ipv6-watchdog-9.40-2.gce849c7.i686.rpm) on the UTM.

The ppp0 interface did get the prefix correctly.  Let us keep monitoring the behavior now...

Thanks,

Prakash

Hi Prakash,

Does this new version also solve my issue?

Regards,
René

OK good news; the patch seems to fix the rebind/renew and the IPv6 prefix is responding again

bad news: the prefix changes on every reconnect, it seems to ignore DUID or generates a new one (speculation at this point) each time it connects.

Before this version the prefix always stayed the same (and also does with other routes connected) so this must be some side effect of the fix.

Edit: ok i made 2 wireshark dumps, with the old patch and the new patch, here are the differences:

old patch on pppoe reconnect:

solicit, advertise going on for the WAN Interface (solicit is without prefix delegation!), than a REBIND happens for the OLD Prefix, Cisco ISP Router replys and confirms the old prefix!

new patch on pppoe reconnect:

solicit, advertise happened (with prefix delegation!), it seems the cisco isp router than proposes a NEW prefix, Sophos sends a REQUEST with the new proposed prefix. sophos never tries to rebind on the old prefix.

remarks: this only happens on interface reconnect, when just applying the patch and restarting the ipv6 watchguard the old prefix is beeing used. The new patch seems to just request a new prefix through the solicit without trying to "get" the old one. When applying back the old patch and restarting the ipv6 watchguard the prefix won't change.

i have put these two pcap (one with the old patch 1.x, one with the current patch 2.1) on the sophos with the ticket in /home/login/pcap-testmachine1/ .. these are pcaps from my testmachine since i dont want to bring the connection on the other machine up and down as much.

Hi Ben,

I guess I know what could be causing the prefix to change on every reconnect.

I have copied another fix to you UTM (/root/fix-2.2/ep-ipv6-watchdog-9.40-4.gce64053.i686.rpm) which might solve this problem. Please install it and let me know how it goes.

Thanks,

Prakash

Hi René,

Please get the latest fix (/root/fix-2.2/ep-ipv6-watchdog-9.40-4.gce64053.i686.rpm) from Ben.

It has the fix for your issue too. Let me know if it works for you.

In any case, please collect the ipv6.log and system.log files from /var/log and also provide packet captures if possible.

Thanks,

Prakash

Hello Prakash,

thanks again for the swift reply, this fix indeed seems to fix all the issues! It did a rebind on reconnect instead of getting a new prefix. 

I will now let this run for 2-3 days and than report back :)

THANK YOU! :-) and big thanks to any other developer involved in this fix! 

Hi Prakash, Ben, etc :)

Is it possible to receive this hotfix as well? I'd like to test if it now works with XS4ALL. Would love to have my SG125w fully up and running again :)
Since this is in the UTM 9.5 beta board, I can use the beta as base? Or did you install it on the latest 9.4?

Hi,

as long as Prakash is ok with that ill provide you with the patch. I am running on 9.4, i think Rene is running on 9.5 beta. Since the patch only patches the ipv6 watchdog files (i think) you should be OK with 9.5 beta.

Hi SanderRutten,

You are free to get the rpm from Ben.

However, please note that this fix was only verified for 9.411-3.1. But, as Ben said, it should (I am 'pretty' sure it would) work if installed over 9.5 Beta too.

-Prakash

Hi SanderRutten,

You are free to get the rpm from Ben.

However, please note that this fix was only verified for 9.411-3.1. But, as Ben said, it should (I am 'pretty' sure it would) work if installed over 9.5 Beta too.

-Prakash

One way to find out ;-)

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

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"

Somehow it also a relief that you can reproduce my problem ;)

If you just add the default route manually it should work for now:
# route add -A inet6 default gw <remote LL> dev ppp0

Regarding the issue that everything was using 2001:981:9D6E:1::1. Are you doing some NAT translation?

Hi All,

   My name is Duc Le. I am a new member of NSG.

   I've been working with Prakash on this issue for a bit of time before his vacation.

   Since I am a newbie on this issue, I just wonder if you (rklomp and SanderRutten)

   can do the followings (A):

   1) Running the system (UTM with Prakash patch) as vanilla as possible. This is to reduce noise.

       Only concentrate on IPv6 address problem. (this is only a reminder, please ignore if you already. Thanks)

   2) Capture tcpdump

   3) Capture UTM log files (ipv6 and pppoe) and other logs if you think they are needed

   4) Capture system log (dmesg)

   5) Capture these: ifconfig -a, route table info, ps -elaf

   6) Misc Info as you think needed

    I suspected there might be some sort of race condition as to sometimes you see "Installing default route"

    and sometimes not.

   That's all for now. Please let me know your comments, ideas or questions. Thanks.

Regards

Le

P.S. I prefer to be called Le. Thanks.