Re: [gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2019-11-27, Dale wrote: >> Grant Edwards wrote: >>> The TP-Link Archer C7 runs openwrt flawlessly: >>> >>> >>> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-archer-ac1750-dual-band-wi-fi-5-router-black/5889900.p?skuId=5889900 >>> >>> A couple months ago when I was shopping, there was also a newer A7 >>> version. That still requires a bleeding edge version of OpenWRT. >>> So I opted for the older hardware just to be safe. >> I was planning to stick with Linksys but I'm liking the one you >> linked too. By the way, TP-Link has a store on ebay and it's cheaper >> there. Anyway, it supports IPv6 according to the manual > IPv6 support is purely a function of the firmware. OpenWRT supports > IPv6 and will do so even if the OEM firmware does not. > >> and it has LEDs on the front it seems. Am I seeing LEDs or am I >> seeing something else? Also, does it have some holes on the bottom >> that allows wall mounting? I'm trying to find a picture of the >> bottom but so far, no luck. I've found pics of everything else tho. > Yes, there are LEDs on the front and wall-mount screw holes on the bottom: > > https://photos.app.goo.gl/V3KL8ZTDPHBUWB726 > > The C7 and A7 versions are slightly different, so pay attention to > that. The C7 is the older, more expensive version that's supported by > the released, stable version of OpenWRT. The A7 is newer and requires > the latest "snapshot" version of OpenWRT. > > I can't vouch for the OEM firmware, since I immediately installed > OpenWRT on mine. > > -- > Grant > > > One more question Grant, if you know. Do you know about the range of the wireless on this router? You ever tested to see how far say a cell phone or something will hold a signal and work? I had to move my printer to the kitchen, a far bedroom was to far away. It would get a signal at times but not often enough. It's about 60 feet away and really only two thin interior walls between the router and printer. My cell phone does better for some reason. I can go outside and be about 100 feet away and it still update the weather info fairly quickly. I'm just curious if you have tested this and can share some experience with how it works in the real world. Thanks much. Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On 2019-11-28 04:11, Ralph Seichter wrote: > > But what about connecting to the outside world? For that, the > > link-local address doesn't work. > > It does work, actually. fe80::1 is a perfectly valid way to specify the > default gateway. Remember that NICs have several IPv6 addresses with > different scopes. Sorry, I'm still confused :-( My host has to set the source address field in outgoing packets to something. If it's the link local address the router can't just forward it unmodified, or upstream routers and hosts won't know where it originally came from. What am I missing? wikipedia: In a computer network, a link-local address is a network address that is valid only for communications within the network segment or the broadcast domain that the host is connected to. As for fe80::1 being good as it is ... matica!8 lc$ route -6 Kernel IPv6 routing table DestinationNext Hop Flag Met Ref Use If localhost/128 [::] Un 0 2 0 lo fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d/128 [::] Un 0 3 0 enp2s0 fe80::/64 [::] U256 2 0 enp2s0 ff00::/8 [::] U256 2 0 enp2s0 [::]/0 [::] !n -1 1 0 lo matica!9 lc$ ping -6 fe80::1 PING fe80::1(fe80::1) 56 data bytes >From fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d%enp2s0: icmp_seq=1 Destination unreachable: >Address unreachable >From fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d%enp2s0: icmp_seq=2 Destination unreachable: >Address unreachable >From fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d%enp2s0: icmp_seq=3 Destination unreachable: >Address unreachable >From fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d%enp2s0: icmp_seq=4 Destination unreachable: >Address unreachable >From fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d%enp2s0: icmp_seq=5 Destination unreachable: >Address unreachable >From fe80::52e5:49ff:fec0:504d%enp2s0: icmp_seq=6 Destination unreachable: >Address unreachable ^C --- fe80::1 ping statistics --- 7 packets transmitted, 0 received, +6 errors, 100% packet loss, time 143ms pipe 3 matica!10 lc$ traceroute -6 fe80::1 traceroute to fe80::1 (fe80::1), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets connect: Invalid argument > > No configuration needed for this ULA thing? How does it happen, then - > > is it implemented entirely in the kernel? > > Before I try to come up with my own explanation, I suggest you search > for terms like Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) and Stateless Address > Autoconfiguration (SLAAC). The latter, for example, is the reason why > DHCPv6 is often not necessary. Ok, I'll do that ... I wonder if those can give me a real address though. -- Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet, if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup. To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
* Ian Zimmerman: > But what about connecting to the outside world? For that, the > link-local address doesn't work. It does work, actually. fe80::1 is a perfectly valid way to specify the default gateway. Remember that NICs have several IPv6 addresses with different scopes. > No configuration needed for this ULA thing? How does it happen, then - > is it implemented entirely in the kernel? Before I try to come up with my own explanation, I suggest you search for terms like Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) and Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC). The latter, for example, is the reason why DHCPv6 is often not necessary. -Ralph
[gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On 2019-11-28 03:07, Ralph Seichter wrote: > Personally, I don't think static IPv6 addresses are very useful, > because machines in a local IPv6 network can easily locate each other > using link-local addressing, without the need to configure this in any > way. In the example above, the link-local address fe80::1 means "the > default IPv6 gateway out of here". But what about connecting to the outside world? For that, the link-local address doesn't work. If I'm relying on the router to rewrite the source address for such connections, I'm already doing the equivalent of NAT, and IPv6 was supposed to do away with those :-P > IPv6 has more convenient mechanisms, like unique local addresses (ULA), > that can be configured but don't need to be. If your router is smart > enough, no configuration is required on the end nodes; be it Linux, > macOS, Windows, or various smartphones. > One of the many available sources of information is hosted by The Linux > Documentation Project[1]. I knew about LDP, but I thought I needed some gentoo specifics, such as the conf.d/net syntax. You answered that and thanks. Still, I feel I'm floating in an exoplanetary orbit. No configuration needed for this ULA thing? How does it happen, then - is it implemented entirely in the kernel? -- Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet, if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup. To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
I can switch provider (currently with Vodafone) but in Italy only Fastweb has IPv6 (AFAIK) and it's not native but 6RD Il Lun 25 Nov 2019, 15:54 Ralph Seichter ha scritto: > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-list/2019-November/001712.html > > This does not come as a surprise, of course, but I consider it a good > point in time to pause and ask oneself what each individual can do to > move further towards IPv6. The end is neigh(ish). > > -Ralph > >
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
* Ian Zimmerman: > So, how to configure IPv6 on an end user gentoo box (not a router)? This depends on how clever your existing router is. If it provides Router Advertisement, like the FRITZ!Box 7xxx line does, IPv6 clients should be configured automatically. As an alternative, you can run net-misc/radvd in your network. It is also possible to use fixed addresses like so (2001::: is an imaginary /64 subnet and the rest is based on what you posted): config_enp2s0="192.168.1.10/24 2001:::::10/64" routes_enp2s0="default via 192.168.1.1 default via fe80::1" In case you're wondering, the variables config_x and routes_x can indeed contain line breaks. Personally, I don't think static IPv6 addresses are very useful, because machines in a local IPv6 network can easily locate each other using link-local addressing, without the need to configure this in any way. In the example above, the link-local address fe80::1 means "the default IPv6 gateway out of here". IPv6 has more convenient mechanisms, like unique local addresses (ULA), that can be configured but don't need to be. If your router is smart enough, no configuration is required on the end nodes; be it Linux, macOS, Windows, or various smartphones. One of the many available sources of information is hosted by The Linux Documentation Project[1]. -Ralph [1] https://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Linux+IPv6-HOWTO/index.html
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:36 PM Dale wrote: >> I've found that asking here is best. If it wasn't for my post here, I >> would have stuck with Linksys because it is what I've used in the past. >> Thing is, a post here lead me to a better product, even tho it wasn't a >> Linksys product. It's one reason I post questions here quite often. I >> get more info from here than I could likely ever find elsewhere because >> most people here post about their own experience not some theory. You >> should know, you post about yours quite often and it's generally a good >> idea to give it some weight when deciding something. >> > Linksys had that one router eons ago that was capable of running linux > (might have run it out of the box - I forget). Back in the day there > weren't many options and they were one of the better ones. > > They only got worse, and a lot of much better options have come out > since then. LOTS of better options. There are ARM-based PCs designed > to run pfsense and so on with multiple NICs. Buffalo makes routers > with DD-WRT pre-installed, and while I'd double check in the past they > could all be trivially flashed to OpenWRT. > > I'd also seriously consider Ubiquiti. An ER-X can be found in the $60 > range and supports routing at gigabit speeds. It runs linux already > out of the box with ssh/etc and a CLI, or a nice web GUI. It looks > like it isn't hard to flash OpenWRT on it as well though there seem to > be some caveats (disclaimer: I've never tried it). > > There are a couple of good options. > > I'd seriously consider using something that does what you want out of > the box before going the OpenWRT route. I don't think EdgeOS is > actually FOSS, but it is largely built on FOSS, so if it does what you > want out of the box and is easy to maintain that is a win, and if at > any point it doesn't get support you can then go the OpenWRT route. > > That said, I've run a router on OpenWRT for ages as well. I think > that is a bit more work without much gain, but you can do it. > > Oh, one thing I would avoid doing is running a bazillion services on > your router. Yes, if it is a linux/bsd box you can run whatever you > want on it. Yes, a lot of that stuff is already packaged and easy to > install. Just consider why you have a firewall in the first place (ie > another layer of isolation), and that this is likely a device with > minimum CPU/RAM/etc and whether you REALLY want to be hosting all this > stuff on a box that is a serious PITA to backup/image or rescue if it > doesn't boot up right. Generally I don't host anything on a router > that isn't directly related to its mission, so that could include > updating a dynamic DNS address, serving DHCP, or maybe serving DNS. > I've tried running OpenVPN and such on them and have found performance > generally suffers for it. > Someone mentioned the Linksys I have is a somewhat crippled version or something like that. Still, it has worked for ages with zero problems. I think I had to reset it once to fix something. Thing is, I've had to reset my modem a couple times too. I think during storms some noise gets on the phone line, DSL here, and it screws it up somehow. It's rare tho. Still, I've been happy with the thing even tho it is crippled or something. One thing I've learned in electronics, what is good this year may be awful the next. My First rig had a Abit mobo. Shortly after that they seem to have went downhill and then went out of business it seems. My current rig has a Gigabyte mobo, was a good board and brand when I bought it. Thing is, Gigabyte, the newer stuff, may be crap nowadays. Who knows. Same with hard drives, one batch may be awesome, the next may be a total disaster. As you said, Linksys used to be a good brand. It seems TP-Link may have took a little out of that. Likely some others as well. It's just the way it is nowadays with fast production and lower quality. One doesn't know tho until one asks. ;-) Given what I have now and that what I'm looking into seems to be a better router, it will likely be a plug-n-play for me. Once TP-Link stops supporting it, then I may have to use Openwrt or something. At least I have some options and it will support the IPv6 stuff out of the box. I'm still not sure about my modem yet. Either bridged mode or a new one of those to I guess. Thanks for all the info. Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On 2019-11-25 15:53, Ralph Seichter wrote: > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-list/2019-November/001712.html > > This does not come as a surprise, of course, but I consider it a good > point in time to pause and ask oneself what each individual can do to > move further towards IPv6. The end is neigh(ish). So, how to configure IPv6 on an end user gentoo box (not a router)? This is my entire etc/conf.d/net right now: dns_domain_lo="foo.bar.baz" config_enp2s0="192.168.1.10 netmask 255.255.255.0" routes_enp2s0="default via 192.168.1.1" (and a couple of fixed nameservers in /etc/resolv.conf) Note it's a static IPv4 address. I don't run a DHCP client, and I don't want to start one just for IPv6. I hoped to find instructions on how to do the equivalent for IPv6, but a search on the wiki didn't return anything obvious - the hits are for router configuration. My router (running OpenWRT) already has an IPv6 prefix, so I assume all I need to do is to assign myself a full IPv6 address in that range. But I don't know how. -- Please don't Cc: me privately on mailing lists and Usenet, if you also post the followup to the list or newsgroup. To reply privately _only_ on Usenet and on broken lists which rewrite From, fetch the TXT record for no-use.mooo.com.
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 14:30:54 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > Generally I don't host anything on a router > that isn't directly related to its mission, so that could include > updating a dynamic DNS address, serving DHCP, or maybe serving DNS. I don't even do that. I have dnsmasq, as used by DD-WRT and OpenWrt, set up on two boxes on the network, but only running on one. That gives an easy switchover in case of failure. Which reminds me, I really should set up monit to do automatic failover on this. -- Neil Bothwick The cow is nothing but a machine that makes grass fit for us people to eat. pgpWfpcfo2JCm.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:36 PM Dale wrote: > > I've found that asking here is best. If it wasn't for my post here, I > would have stuck with Linksys because it is what I've used in the past. > Thing is, a post here lead me to a better product, even tho it wasn't a > Linksys product. It's one reason I post questions here quite often. I > get more info from here than I could likely ever find elsewhere because > most people here post about their own experience not some theory. You > should know, you post about yours quite often and it's generally a good > idea to give it some weight when deciding something. > Linksys had that one router eons ago that was capable of running linux (might have run it out of the box - I forget). Back in the day there weren't many options and they were one of the better ones. They only got worse, and a lot of much better options have come out since then. LOTS of better options. There are ARM-based PCs designed to run pfsense and so on with multiple NICs. Buffalo makes routers with DD-WRT pre-installed, and while I'd double check in the past they could all be trivially flashed to OpenWRT. I'd also seriously consider Ubiquiti. An ER-X can be found in the $60 range and supports routing at gigabit speeds. It runs linux already out of the box with ssh/etc and a CLI, or a nice web GUI. It looks like it isn't hard to flash OpenWRT on it as well though there seem to be some caveats (disclaimer: I've never tried it). There are a couple of good options. I'd seriously consider using something that does what you want out of the box before going the OpenWRT route. I don't think EdgeOS is actually FOSS, but it is largely built on FOSS, so if it does what you want out of the box and is easy to maintain that is a win, and if at any point it doesn't get support you can then go the OpenWRT route. That said, I've run a router on OpenWRT for ages as well. I think that is a bit more work without much gain, but you can do it. Oh, one thing I would avoid doing is running a bazillion services on your router. Yes, if it is a linux/bsd box you can run whatever you want on it. Yes, a lot of that stuff is already packaged and easy to install. Just consider why you have a firewall in the first place (ie another layer of isolation), and that this is likely a device with minimum CPU/RAM/etc and whether you REALLY want to be hosting all this stuff on a box that is a serious PITA to backup/image or rescue if it doesn't boot up right. Generally I don't host anything on a router that isn't directly related to its mission, so that could include updating a dynamic DNS address, serving DHCP, or maybe serving DNS. I've tried running OpenVPN and such on them and have found performance generally suffers for it. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] eix-sync gets stuck
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 11:38:37 +0100, Helmut Jarausch wrote: > recently, eix-sync gets stuck after > > * Verifying /usr/portage/.tmp-unverified-download-quarantine > ...[ ok ] > === Sync completed for gentoo I was getting errors frm emerge --sync referring to this directory. The solution was to delete the portage tree and resync. -- Neil Bothwick Memory Map - A sheet of paper showing location of computer store. pgpnA9OmHp8Mx.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
* Daniel Frey: > I have exactly one choice for an ISP and I need a static IP. The ISP > disables ipv6 for some reason when you have a static IP. Like I said, the availability of "decent" ISPs varies by location, and there are of course locations where one is basically screwed when it comes to IPv6, even in November 2019. I have no intention whatsoever to chide Gentoo users who cannot have IPv6 due to their ISP. I only meant to mention that now is a good time to (a) consider IPv6 if you can get it, (b) consider IPv6 if you thought about purchasing a new router during Black Friday or Christmas sales offers, (c) let your ISP know that you are interested in IPv6, and perhaps consider choosing a different ISP with more modern service (if you realistically can do that). We're not exactly swimming in ISPs where I live, and I have been biting ISP ankles for more than a decade to make my requirements known. Things have improved, luckily, but they are far from perfect. I am simply unwilling to pay for additional single IPv4 addresses while whole IPv6 subnets are available in abundance. According to RIPE, almost every member (LIR) qualifies for a /29 subnet right away, no questions asked, so handing out /48 or at least /56 subnets to customers should be a no-brainer. Gentoo users are often technically skilled and therefore in a position to make good use of IPv6. I think it would be beneficial to let ISPs and router manufacturers know that IPv6 is not some exotic luxury. -Ralph
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
Mick wrote: > On Wednesday, 27 November 2019 01:51:44 GMT Dale wrote: >> Rich Freeman wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 8:10 PM Dale wrote: I went to Newegg. Hey, I buy stuff there sometimes. Anyway, I've looked at several routers and none of them mention IPv6 that I can find. I even skimmed the reviews and can't find a mention of it. Is there some secret way to know when IPv6 is supported? Is it called something else maybe? > It is called the OEM's website where technical specs are provided for each > model. > > It is also called Wikipedia. There may be a page where all models of a > particular manufacturer are listed in some table, explaining their > functionality. I went to the OEMs website but they don't always give info in a way that makes sense to me. I learned more from the Openwrt site than I did the OEMs. OEMs are usually full of fluff and buzzwords. I used to go to wikipedia but after being misled several times, I no longer use it if I can avoid it. I'd be more likely to believe comments in the review section of a product than wikipedia. > There are also webpages with reviews - but careful with those. Most are > nothing more than a shill for Amazon or some such shop, rather than an honest > technical appraisal. Sometimes youtube may have an unwrapping video, or demo > of configuring a particular router - if you are interested to know what they > look like in more detail. > > There are specialist websites like: > > https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/ > > as well as open source firmware projects like OpenWRT/DD-WRT etc., with > useful > blogs and forums to peruse, along with reports for suitable hardware. > > Online shops are the last place to visit, *after* you have concluded which > router is best for you, to see if you can afford the price. Their websites > may have incorrect technical information, out of date specifications and > irrelevant (annoying) marketing speak to attract consumers. Many are just > box-shifters and wouldn't be able to tell you what's in the box you ordered > anyway: "errm ... whatever they're shipping from China these days". o_O > I've found that asking here is best. If it wasn't for my post here, I would have stuck with Linksys because it is what I've used in the past. Thing is, a post here lead me to a better product, even tho it wasn't a Linksys product. It's one reason I post questions here quite often. I get more info from here than I could likely ever find elsewhere because most people here post about their own experience not some theory. You should know, you post about yours quite often and it's generally a good idea to give it some weight when deciding something. >>> IMO there are three reasonable approaches you can take towards getting >>> a router you won't curse yourself for buying a year from now: >>> >>> 1. DIY. PC or other general-purpose computing hardware with multiple >>> NICs. There are SBCs that work well for this. You can run pfsense or >>> some other router-oriented distro/software/wrappers. Or you can just >>> roll your own with netfilter and such. Max flexibility, but also max >>> fuss. Unless you use a SBC you'll also be paying a price in >>> electricity. Don't underestimate how much you pay for any x86-based >>> system that runs 24x7 - especially anything old you have lying around. >> I remember how my old rig pulled power. It pulled like 400 watts or so >> idle. Of course, it was lacking in power so when compiling, there >> wasn't a lot of difference really. In the winter, I rarely needed a >> heater. Its constant heat output kept this bedroom comfy. No real need >> for a heater. It's one reason I want to avoid this option. Mostly, I >> want something I'll get many years of service from and everything work >> well, wired or wireless now that I have a cell phone and printer that >> needs it. My current router pulls like 10 watts or something. >> Considering I run electric heat and such, it's a rounding error for me. >> Heck, my main puter is too. It pulls like 180 watts which includes >> everything, modem, router, monitor and the rig itself. >> >> The positive part tho for option 1, if another port is needed, just add >> a network card and it's done. With DHCP and friends, it will likely >> just work. That's something you can't do with a store bought router. >> Whatever it comes with, that's what you got. I've never needed more >> than the 4 most come with tho. My puter uses one, printer another and >> cell phone. I guess I have one left still. > Every additional network card (PCI or USB) will also incur additional cost > and > soon you could run out of MoBo slots. It makes more sense to buy a dedicated > switch instead, with as many ports as you think you will need to use in the > future. Old routers can also be used as dumb switches, after you disable > their DNS/DHCP/PPP, etc. The world is moving towards high speed wireless > connectivity
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2019-11-27, Dale wrote: >> Grant Edwards wrote: >>> The TP-Link Archer C7 runs openwrt flawlessly: >>> >>> >>> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-archer-ac1750-dual-band-wi-fi-5-router-black/5889900.p?skuId=5889900 >>> >>> A couple months ago when I was shopping, there was also a newer A7 >>> version. That still requires a bleeding edge version of OpenWRT. >>> So I opted for the older hardware just to be safe. >> I was planning to stick with Linksys but I'm liking the one you >> linked too. By the way, TP-Link has a store on ebay and it's cheaper >> there. Anyway, it supports IPv6 according to the manual > IPv6 support is purely a function of the firmware. OpenWRT supports > IPv6 and will do so even if the OEM firmware does not. > >> and it has LEDs on the front it seems. Am I seeing LEDs or am I >> seeing something else? Also, does it have some holes on the bottom >> that allows wall mounting? I'm trying to find a picture of the >> bottom but so far, no luck. I've found pics of everything else tho. > Yes, there are LEDs on the front and wall-mount screw holes on the bottom: > > https://photos.app.goo.gl/V3KL8ZTDPHBUWB726 > > The C7 and A7 versions are slightly different, so pay attention to > that. The C7 is the older, more expensive version that's supported by > the released, stable version of OpenWRT. The A7 is newer and requires > the latest "snapshot" version of OpenWRT. > > I can't vouch for the OEM firmware, since I immediately installed > OpenWRT on mine. > > -- > Grant > I checked on my old router, Openwrt doesn't work on it. So, new router it is. That C7 and A7 was throwing me for a bit. The first ones I found were A7 but after doing some searching, I realized they are different hardware wise. After that, I made sure which I was looking at. I've found a few C7s that range in price from around $50 to $75. Some are refurbed, some are open box. As long as it works, I'm fine with that. I am glad those are LEDs. I may be able to see those better than the ones on the Linksys. Later on, I found a review site that had a pic of the bottom. I saw two holes on the side in the middle. Given those things tend to be light in weight, that should be fine. I wish I could wall mount my old Linksys. I've thought about using zip ties or something to wall mount it. I don't have a large enough desk for all this stuff. I do like the speakers I built tho. I sat my monitor on it. It thumps pretty good. ;-) Thanks for the info. I think this has led me to a much better path and product. Having someone tell me they have one and it works, that takes a lot of doubt out of it. Thanks much. Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On 2019-11-27, Dale wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> The TP-Link Archer C7 runs openwrt flawlessly: >> >> >> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tp-link-archer-ac1750-dual-band-wi-fi-5-router-black/5889900.p?skuId=5889900 >> >> A couple months ago when I was shopping, there was also a newer A7 >> version. That still requires a bleeding edge version of OpenWRT. >> So I opted for the older hardware just to be safe. > I was planning to stick with Linksys but I'm liking the one you > linked too. By the way, TP-Link has a store on ebay and it's cheaper > there. Anyway, it supports IPv6 according to the manual IPv6 support is purely a function of the firmware. OpenWRT supports IPv6 and will do so even if the OEM firmware does not. > and it has LEDs on the front it seems. Am I seeing LEDs or am I > seeing something else? Also, does it have some holes on the bottom > that allows wall mounting? I'm trying to find a picture of the > bottom but so far, no luck. I've found pics of everything else tho. Yes, there are LEDs on the front and wall-mount screw holes on the bottom: https://photos.app.goo.gl/V3KL8ZTDPHBUWB726 The C7 and A7 versions are slightly different, so pay attention to that. The C7 is the older, more expensive version that's supported by the released, stable version of OpenWRT. The A7 is newer and requires the latest "snapshot" version of OpenWRT. I can't vouch for the OEM firmware, since I immediately installed OpenWRT on mine. -- Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On 2019-11-26 15:41, Ralph Seichter wrote: * Daniel Frey: Can't do anything, ipv6 is completely disabled (removed from kernel config.) A search for "linux kernel enable ipv6" just returned more than 1.7 million results. Even if I recompile my custom kernels it won't work. Current ISP will not issue any ipv6 if an ipv4 static is required. My current ISP offers native IPv6 and has been doing so for years. While choice varies across different countries, IPv6 availability has increased considerably over the last 10 years, which is why SiXXs.net has discontinued services[1] mid 2017. Even a small amount of searching should turn up a decent ISP in most industrialized countries. That's great! Except I'm obviously not living where you are. I have exactly one choice for an ISP and I need a static IP. The ISP disables ipv6 for some reason when you have a static IP. Housing is terribly expensive here and I'm not moving to get ipv6, that's just stupid. Seriously, IPv4 may appear to work "just fine" for you, but there is a lot of nasty stuff like NAT going on under the hood. IPv6 means a lot less hassle if you have a decent ISP and a halfway modern router. They do have ipv6 on residential accounts and their implementation has caused many problems with devices. This was years ago. I would hope they've fixed all the network delays that were present with a dual-stack configuration - one of the major issues is that a single DNS lookup would take 90 seconds to return a result. Only way to fix it was to disable ipv6 in their router. When you phoned in to report a problem, they'd say "looks good on our end" and close the ticket. I disabled ipv6 that day, but when I got a static IP I found out I couldn't get ipv6 anyway. Dan
[gentoo-user] app-text/foliate ebuild?
Hi, I came across the "modern ebook reader" foliate (github.com/johnfactotum/foliate) Since I don't know about meson, I failed to write an ebuild for that. Has anybody know about an ebuild for foliate? Many thanks for some help, Helmut
[gentoo-user] eix-sync gets stuck
Hi, recently, eix-sync gets stuck after * Verifying /usr/portage/.tmp-unverified-download-quarantine ...[ ok ] === Sync completed for gentoo Killing it with C and restarting it with eix-sync -a fixes this. Do I have to clean some files? Many thanks for a hint, Helmut
Re: [gentoo-user] To all IPv6-slackers among the Gentoo community
On Wednesday, 27 November 2019 01:51:44 GMT Dale wrote: > Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 8:10 PM Dale wrote: > >> I went to Newegg. Hey, I buy stuff there sometimes. Anyway, I've > >> looked at several routers and none of them mention IPv6 that I can > >> find. I even skimmed the reviews and can't find a mention of it. Is > >> there some secret way to know when IPv6 is supported? Is it called > >> something else maybe? It is called the OEM's website where technical specs are provided for each model. It is also called Wikipedia. There may be a page where all models of a particular manufacturer are listed in some table, explaining their functionality. There are also webpages with reviews - but careful with those. Most are nothing more than a shill for Amazon or some such shop, rather than an honest technical appraisal. Sometimes youtube may have an unwrapping video, or demo of configuring a particular router - if you are interested to know what they look like in more detail. There are specialist websites like: https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/ as well as open source firmware projects like OpenWRT/DD-WRT etc., with useful blogs and forums to peruse, along with reports for suitable hardware. Online shops are the last place to visit, *after* you have concluded which router is best for you, to see if you can afford the price. Their websites may have incorrect technical information, out of date specifications and irrelevant (annoying) marketing speak to attract consumers. Many are just box-shifters and wouldn't be able to tell you what's in the box you ordered anyway: "errm ... whatever they're shipping from China these days". o_O > > IMO there are three reasonable approaches you can take towards getting > > a router you won't curse yourself for buying a year from now: > > > > 1. DIY. PC or other general-purpose computing hardware with multiple > > NICs. There are SBCs that work well for this. You can run pfsense or > > some other router-oriented distro/software/wrappers. Or you can just > > roll your own with netfilter and such. Max flexibility, but also max > > fuss. Unless you use a SBC you'll also be paying a price in > > electricity. Don't underestimate how much you pay for any x86-based > > system that runs 24x7 - especially anything old you have lying around. > > I remember how my old rig pulled power. It pulled like 400 watts or so > idle. Of course, it was lacking in power so when compiling, there > wasn't a lot of difference really. In the winter, I rarely needed a > heater. Its constant heat output kept this bedroom comfy. No real need > for a heater. It's one reason I want to avoid this option. Mostly, I > want something I'll get many years of service from and everything work > well, wired or wireless now that I have a cell phone and printer that > needs it. My current router pulls like 10 watts or something. > Considering I run electric heat and such, it's a rounding error for me. > Heck, my main puter is too. It pulls like 180 watts which includes > everything, modem, router, monitor and the rig itself. > > The positive part tho for option 1, if another port is needed, just add > a network card and it's done. With DHCP and friends, it will likely > just work. That's something you can't do with a store bought router. > Whatever it comes with, that's what you got. I've never needed more > than the 4 most come with tho. My puter uses one, printer another and > cell phone. I guess I have one left still. Every additional network card (PCI or USB) will also incur additional cost and soon you could run out of MoBo slots. It makes more sense to buy a dedicated switch instead, with as many ports as you think you will need to use in the future. Old routers can also be used as dumb switches, after you disable their DNS/DHCP/PPP, etc. The world is moving towards high speed wireless connectivity anyway, so more and more devices will not need a physical switch port or ethernet cables to gain access to the network. > > 2. OpenWRT/DD-WRT/etc. Again it is a bit fussy but generally way > > less so than going pure DIY unless you're running pfsense or some > > other appliance-oriented distro. If you go this route then definitely > > check for recommendations on hardware that is known to work WELL. > > Some stuff technically works but can be very prone to having to play > > around with JTAG and such if you make the slightest mistake. You'll > > probably spend an extra $20 on hardware you won't regret buying - do > > it. +1 Trying to save a few pennies could result in being lumbered with suboptimal hardware. > That's what I'm wanting as a option. I may just use the firmware that > comes with the thing for a good while. Later on tho, if needed, I may > switch to Openwrt or some other option that may work better. It's a > option I'd like to have if possible. This is generally a good option because OEMs hardly ever
