Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

Bug #4544

closed

PD not requested if no interfaces set to track6

Added by Jan Joris Vereijken about 9 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Renato Botelho
Category:
Interfaces
Target version:
2.3.4-p1
Start date:
03/22/2015
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:
Plus Target Version:
Release Notes:
Affected Version:
2.2.x
Affected Architecture:

Description

Bug #4436 disable prefix delegation requests when no tracking interface is defined. This causes a regression in combination with Network Prefix Translation in a dual-WAN setup and a Unique Local Address range on the LAN interface: pfSense requests prefix delegation from both WAN interfaces, and uses NPT to perform translation for the ULA addresses on the LAN toward the respective delegated prefixes, e.g. for load balancing or failover purposes.

In the scenario, the prefix delegation on the WAN interfaces is required, but there is no tracking interface, because the LAN interface needs to be static IPv6 with the ULA addresses.

I have such a set-up, and upgrading from 2.2 tot 2.2.1 broke IPv6 for this reason.

Can we have more control over prefix delegation, so that we can re-enable it in scenarios like this one?

Actions
Copy link
 #1

Updated by Chris Buechler about 9 years ago

  • Project changed from pfSense Packages to pfSense
  • Status changed from New to Feedback
  • Assignee set to Chris Buechler

there is a workaround for this, but I'll revisit the subject as a whole.

Actions
Copy link
 #2

Updated by Chris Buechler about 8 years ago

  • Category set to Interfaces
Actions
Copy link
 #3

Updated by Chris Buechler almost 8 years ago

  • Subject changed from Bug #4436 causing regression on NPT setup to PD not requested if no interfaces set to track6
  • Status changed from Feedback to Confirmed
  • Target version set to 2.3.2
  • Affected Version set to 2.2.x

updated subject is the issue. That case shouldn't cause it to skip requesting PD, for cases where the PD is actually static and people want to statically configure it, and cases like OP's with NPT.

Actions
Copy link
 #4

Updated by Chris Buechler almost 8 years ago

  • Assignee deleted (Chris Buechler)
  • Target version changed from 2.3.2 to 2.4.0

The code here is at fault.
https://github.com/pfsense/pfsense/blob/master/src/etc/inc/interfaces.inc#L3927

It should still include the 'send ia-pd' in the dhcp6c config even if there are no track interfaces.

With a short timeline on getting a 2.3.2 out, that's not a reasonable change to make there at this point, since this is an uncommon circumstance and has risk of introducing regressions for the common circumstances.

Actions
Copy link
 #6

Updated by Kill Bill almost 7 years ago

Can someone kindly review the PR before it's again too late even for 2.4?

Actions
Copy link
 #7

Updated by Renato Botelho almost 7 years ago

  • Status changed from Confirmed to Feedback
  • Assignee set to Renato Botelho
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

PR has been merged, thanks!

Actions
Copy link
 #8

Updated by Kill Bill almost 7 years ago

Thanks as well. :)

Actions
Copy link
 #9

Updated by Jim Pingle almost 7 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Resolved
  • Target version changed from 2.4.0 to 2.3.4-p1
Actions
Copy link
 #10

Updated by Renato Botelho over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to New
  • Target version changed from 2.3.4-p1 to CE-Next

I've reverted this change in order to fix #11005. A new approach should be used for that case

Actions
Copy link
 #11

Updated by Renato Botelho over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Resolved
  • Target version changed from CE-Next to 2.3.4-p1

Patch was re-applied and this ticket remains the same

Actions
Copy link

Also available in: Atom PDF