Re: T-Mobile DE IPv6-only APN
I'll see if I can poke around in their OpenWRT base system to get it working anyway. Openwrt has two competing apps for that. The old one is |uqmi and the new one is "modemmanager".| |I still have trouble with both of them since I dont't understand how openwrt relays/bridges the wan6 interface to the rest of the network.| |The chances are good that you get it working. | |Regards,| |Thomas | | | *| |* *| |* *| |* *| |*
Re: T-Mobile DE IPv6-only APN
Am 31.01.20 um 19:18 schrieb Kristian McColm: I'll do some research over the next dasy why Quectel 4G modems in Teltonika routers won't do IPv6 at all. At least the QUECTELEC25-E works well with Telekom dualstack, Vodafone dualstack and Telekom ipv6-only. Here are some log files tested with Vodafone. http://www.thomas--schaefer.de/vodafone/ec25.txt
Re: peering AWS - DTAG
Yes, it works. Thanks to the people from DTAG, AWS and space.net. Thomas Am 08.05.2018 um 14:55 schrieb Jens Link: Hi, just talked to someone from AWS. From their side everything looks okay right now. Ping from https://f-lga1.f.de.net.dtag.de/index.php?pageid=ping also works. Jens -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
peering AWS - DTAG
Hi, here is a unsolved problem still circulating within the first level support of the DTAG. If someone from Amazon and/or DTAG with peering knowledge and permissions could read/solve it - it would be nice. https://telekomhilft.telekom.de/t5/Telefonie-Internet/IPv6-Routing-probleme-zu-AWS/td-p/3225368 https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de=de=en=https%3A%2F%2Ftelekomhilft.telekom.de%2Ft5%2FTelefonie-Internet%2FIPv6-Routing-probleme-zu-AWS%2Ftd-p%2F3225368 Short version: 2600:9000:20ad:4e00:0:8a28:1580:93a1 is not reachable from AS3320 Regards, Thomas
Re: Fwd: SixXS shutting down 2017-06-06
Am 23.03.2017 um 16:11 schrieb Josh Galvez: Received this message this morning, thought you'd all appreciate seeing it... It was already published yesterday: https://www.root.cz/clanky/sixxs-vypne-ipv6-tunely-sluzby-ukonci-6-cervna/ but to good news, there still bad news http://ral-arturo.org/2017/03/22/ipv6-cgnat.html Somebody from Spain here? Regards, Thomas
Re: question regarding over the counter devices
Am 06.03.2017 um 13:48 schrieb Gert Doering: 3G mandated IPv6, no carrier actually deployed it *before* they had a huge legacy of IPv4-only handsets in the field... could have been done from day one. One interesting point here is: Despite the late start of the mobile network people, we have some user equipment at the moment. LTE/UMTS-modems(usb/mPCIe) - no firewall issue - because it is exclusively done / not done by the OS of the connected device (e.g. Notebook) LTE/UMTS - router, my focus is on the mobile things here: I never have seen firewall settings for IPv6, only a lot of mostly obsolete IPv4-features LTE-router for DSL-replacement may be better here, but I don't know Some phones are able to share IPv6-connections (tethering, hotspot-mode): Do they provide a firewall? Is it useful? Can anybody test it? I can't because there is a big firewall by the ISP. Regards, Thomas
Re: question regarding over the counter devices
Am 06.03.2017 um 12:11 schrieb Florian Lohoff: Aunt Tilly You are dealing with non technical people. You contradict yourself. Non technical people have no clue about IPv6/IPv4, some of them flood the support(in Germany Unitymedia/UPC, Vodafone)) because their PS-games don't work anymore with CGNAT as part of DS-lite. But they got the change implicitly via the new AGB(Terms and Conditions small printed) while upgrading the speed without being asked about the protocol changes. A further example is the mobile network. After changing the network profile on IOS-devices, the user cannot opt out. Without a choice (switched on is switched on the IPv6-monitoring must be better. Last Friday the IPv6-connection between DTAG and google was broken for some hours. Non technical people have no chance to debug the slow motion web sites in this case. Regards, Thomas
Re: Linux and ULA support and default route
I was wrong. Randomly set: no, manually change possible: yes. The reason for my confusion was "::" versus ":" Sometimes reading ipv6-addresses is hard.
Re: Linux and ULA support and default route
Am 13.10.2016 um 21:56 schrieb Brian E Carpenter: On 13/10/2016 21:14, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: Of note is the fact that the ULA prefix being announced is the ubiquitous fd00::/64. 0 is a perfectly random number, just like the ubiquitous PIN code 1234. But yes, this a sloppy job by the FritzBox. Hopefully they've fixed this in more recent models. It is fixed. In newer versions it is a random number and can additionally changed manually. Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: DHCPv6 client in Windows 10 broken after anniversary update
Am 10.10.2016 um 10:14 schrieb Harald F. Karlsen: Hi, Have anyone on the list experienced issues with this yet? If so, have you contacted Microsoft and what did they say? I've found reports on this issue dating back from early august so it's strange that Microsoft have not yet issued a fix for it. I can confirm the behavior for stateless DHCP with missing IPv6-DNS-entries. After "ipconfig /renew6" they appear. Regards, Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: SV: SV: SV: CPE Residential IPv6 Security Poll
Am 29.09.2016 um 13:50 schrieb e.vanu...@avm.de: CU at BBWF ;-) We are building CPE with IPv6 on board. https://tmt.knect365.com/bbwf/sponsors/avm Eric Without IPv6-support for vpn, without configurable firewall for dhcpv6-pd, without the ability to disable IPv4-myfritz-DNS-entries. Some IPv6-menus still hidden, only in expert view or far far away from the users focus. AVM is good, but not perfect. Regards, Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: SV: CPE Residential IPv6 Security Poll
Am 21.09.2016 um 14:58 schrieb Jeroen Massar: The major mistake that ISPs are making here btw is marketing: they are not informing their users I am not sure about this advice. (I read the forum from vodafone, telekom and unitymedia in Germany daily) One similar example: VOIP The Deutsche Telekom has clearly stated what she planned - a complete ip-infrastructure without ISDN, with marketing and so on... What was the reaction? The people and also some journalist are against VOIP. They found 1000 reasons why. Only the Telekom was blamed. But - Kabel Deutschland (now Vodafone) and other ISPs did the same without public trouble. Apropos VOIP and Deutsche Telekom, my router phones still via ipv4, while Liberty Global (Unitymedia) routers use partly IPv6. Regards, Thomas Schäfer -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?
Am 25.04.2016 um 17:40 schrieb Eric Vyncke (evyncke): Thanks to all people pointing me towards a DNS issue. I read this thread with great interest. I have a Marshmallow dualstacked via Wifi (and via mobile), and I have no issues so far. One thing troubles me. In my configuration the router gets at least four dns-resolvers two ipv4 and two ipv6 from the isp. The router itself checks the reliability and announces its own ip-address as resolver to the clients. A dead resolver would theoretically never reach the client. Is this a special feature of avm? Regards, Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: google<<>>Deutsche Telekom
It works again. There was a "nice" map: http://allestörungen.de/stoerung/google/karte/ Thanks, Thomas Schäfer
google<<>>Deutsche Telekom
Hi, at the moment(for 8 hours or longer) seems to be a problem between google and Deutsche Telekom (AS3320). I am wondering about just one person (forum at telekom) and I complaining it. Can anybody confirm or solving the problem? A lot of google-services load very slowly(fallback to IPv4), also websites with fonts loaded from google. googles public-dns is working, but no other things. Regards, Thomas
Problems with AS40015 and AS30071 <--> AS3320
Hi, I am in conflict with the support of Deutsche Telekom (AS3320). They check my DSL-connection again and again. And I try to explain that there must be a bigger problem. The problem itself is very simple: bin6.it v6.testmyipv6.com are not reachable from the network of Deutsche Telekom ( DSL, LTE, - no route to host) >From some other hosts e.g. my workplace at DFN/LRZ it works, at least ping, at the moment port 80 seems to be down. Also http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php indicates that at least v6.testmyipv6.com is alive. Is somebody here, who could confirm or better fix the problems between these AS? Regards, Thomas PS: traceroutes from Deutsche Telekom (not ok) and DFN (ok) can be found here: https://telekomhilft.telekom.de/t5/Telefonie-Internet/Destination-unreachable-No-route/td-p/1523108/page/2
Re: test-ipv6.com out of service?
Thanks for confirmation. it seems to be up again. test-ipv6.com has no , but ds.test-ipv6.com has and is reachable again. Thomas
some mirrors of opensuse-repos seem to be broken
Hi, I know you are not the support of opensuse, and I don't ask how to disable IPv6. (I know it.) But in the last two weeks I observe strange slow speeds to opensuse-repos via IPv6. Unfortunately the tool zypper connects some servers in parallel, so I don't know which is the problematic one. If you are administrating a mirror at a university, isp, please check your IPv6-interfaces/firewalls. I have the problem from two different native locations. (dfn, dtag) google shows the problem isn't new, but at the moment I think it is very bad. Thanks for the attention. Thomas PS: via IPv4 zypper runs fast, so I think the servers are not overloaded -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: SV: Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...
Am 12.02.2015 um 19:59 schrieb Eric Vyncke (evyncke): Is it related to the paranoid option of blocking all inbound traffic? To mimick NAT44 ? I afraid so. Regarding to http://download.microsoft.com/download/A/C/4/AC4484B8-AA16-446F-86F8-BDFC498F8732/Xbox%20One%20Technical%20Details.docx Even for users that do have native IPv6 – Teredo will be used to interact with IPv4-only peers, or in cases where IPv6 connectivity between peers is not functioning. In general, Xbox One will dynamically assess and use the best available connectivity method (Native IPv6, Teredo, and even IPv4). The implementation is similar in sprit to RFC 6555. and the practice in Germany to blocking all IPv6-inbound traffic the result is the problem for some gamers. To find the guilty and the solution is sometimes complicated: For instance Deutsche Telekom(DSL): In general no IPv6-Traffic is blocked. But the soho-routers (speedport) sold and leased by the Deutsche Telekom have a firewall, which can not be configured nor disabled. (only parts of IPv4 are configurable) The customer has the choice to use router from a third party, e.g. avm. In other cases he has no choice. (KD). But I am not sure about the exact situation because KD changes its strategies DS/DS-lite/IPv4-only and the statements by the customers are not unique. (I am only a customer at DTAG and DFN) Regards, Thomas
Re: Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...
Am 12.02.2015 um 15:01 schrieb Anfinsen, Ragnar: Sure, but this requires our product department to look at IPv4 as legacy and stop caring about customers who do gaming and have their own servers and such. No. We should help them to migrate their games and own servers to IPv6. One argument (it is not true here ) against IPv6 is: I cannot access my NAS/owncloud/vpn ... any more. This stuff maybe used only by some users, but not irrelevant users. Thomas
Re: SV: Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...
Am 12.02.2015 um 13:40 schrieb erik.tarald...@telenor.com: This might be so in Norway. In German customer portals the gamers mostly demand ipv4 (public ipv4 address to their home) instead of DS-Lite. They have already native IPv6 but avm was forced to allow teredo over DS and DS-lite - because xbox has problems with native IPv6. xbox is no good example for *wanting* IPv6. Could you elaborate on the IPv6 issues for xbox? I was under the impresion that xbox works well with IPv6. It was last spring/summer. You can find it also in the archive of this list. In short: xbox did not work at several (IPv6) providers. Some of them have patched their routers and found a solution with Microsoft (comcast). In other parts of the world, *the solution* was to allow teredo at an IPv6-Access. Because I don't own a xbox I haven't sniffed the network behaviour, but I observe some costumer portals (e.g. Kabel Deutschland/Vodafone) and there are still problems, often related to IPv6. (can have other reasons too, like instability at all, Firewalls or something else) Thomas
Re: Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...
Am 12.02.2015 um 12:05 schrieb Tore Anderson: And then if the gamer then starts googling this «IPv6» thing he might find out that it abolishes the hated NAT stuff entirely, and suddenly Microsoft's statement makes perfect sense to him, and he will actually end up actively *wanting* IPv6. This might be so in Norway. In German customer portals the gamers mostly demand ipv4 (public ipv4 address to their home) instead of DS-Lite. They have already native IPv6 but avm was forced to allow teredo over DS and DS-lite - because xbox has problems with native IPv6. xbox is no good example for *wanting* IPv6. Anyway, this is how it is *today* for the XB1, and I've been told that IPv6 support for the PS4 is on its way as well. Any public source/ statement from sony? Regards, Thomas
Re: DTAG - routing
Thank you for answer and explanation. I contacted Contabo. Thomas
Routing problem
Am Samstag, 29. November 2014, 09:44:10 schrieb Grant Ridder: Issue was already solved. I have new one... While looking for NAT64-Software I was a victim of this (beautiful?) loop: from 2003:63:241a:6200:beae:c5ff:feb5:2088 I get: ping6 www.jool.mx PING www.jool.mx(2001:1250:ffe0:1::8) 56 data bytes From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=1 Time exceeded: Hop limit From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=2 Time exceeded: Hop limit From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=3 Time exceeded: Hop limit From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=4 Time exceeded: Hop limit ^C This time there are no difference between the ISPs I can use. The traceroutes are attached. Regards, Thomas dfn-lrz--www.jool.mx.txt.xz Description: application/xz dtagcustomer-www.jool.mx.txt.xz Description: application/xz
Re: wake on lan / wol with linux in IPv6-LAN (without IPv4)
Am Dienstag, 16. September 2014, 14:34:13 schrieb Bjørn Mork:
You could try something like this (might need a bit more error
detection...):
#!/usr/bin/perl
use Socket;
use Socket6;
my $iface = shift;
my $mac = pack(C6, map { hex } split(/:/, shift || die Usage: $0 iface
mac\n)); socket(S, AF_INET6, SOCK_DGRAM, 17);
require sys/ioctl.ph;
ioctl(S, SIOCGIFINDEX, $iface);
setsockopt(S, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_MULTICAST_IF, substr($iface, 16));
send(S, pack(C6, (255) x 6) . $mac x 16, 0, pack_sockaddr_in6(7,
inet_pton(AF_INET6, ff02::1)));
The first try was ok for me. Thanks a lot!
Regards,
Thomas
wake on lan / wol with linux in IPv6-LAN (without IPv4)
Hi, On Saturday I disabled IPv4 in my home network. ( using DNS64/NAT64 for external things). ( no great discussion about it, it is just a test) But I was surprised by this problem: wol 1C:6F:65:C9:87:46 wol: Cannot send magic packet for '1C:6F:65:C9:87:46' to 255.255.255.255:4: Network is unreachable wakeonlan 1C:6F:65:C9:87:46 Sending magic packet to 255.255.255.255:9 with 1C:6F:65:C9:87:46 send : Network is unreachable at /usr/bin/wakeonlan line 83. Does anybody know a small wol implementation for linux, usable in IPv6-LANs? The packages I used are: thomas@eee-box:~ rpm -qi wol Name: wol Version : 0.7.1 Release : 157.1.2 Architecture: x86_64 Install Date: So 17 Nov 2013 15:36:24 CET Group : Productivity/Networking/Boot/Utilities Size: 149735 License : GPL-2.0+ Signature : RSA/SHA256, Fr 27 Sep 2013 22:42:51 CEST, Key ID b88b2fd43dbdc284 Source RPM : wol-0.7.1-157.1.2.src.rpm Build Date : Fr 27 Sep 2013 22:42:34 CEST Build Host : build24 Relocations : (not relocatable) Packager: http://bugs.opensuse.org Vendor : openSUSE URL : http://ahh.sourceforge.net/wol/ Summary : Wake On Lan client Description : The Wake On Lan client wakes up magic packet compliant machines such as boxes with wake-on-lan ethernet-cards. Some workstations provide SecureON which extends wake-on-lan with a password. This feature is also provided by wol. Authors: Thomas Krennwallner krennwall...@aon.at Distribution: openSUSE 13.1 thomas@eee-box:~ rpm -qi wakeonlan Name: wakeonlan Epoch : 0 Version : 0.41 Release : 21.1 Architecture: noarch Install Date: Mo 15 Sep 2014 11:45:29 CEST Group : Development/Libraries Size: 13924 License : Artistic Signature : DSA/SHA1, Di 22 Okt 2013 00:20:22 CEST, Key ID ac99268ca568d868 Source RPM : wakeonlan-0.41-21.1.src.rpm Build Date : Di 22 Okt 2013 00:20:08 CEST Build Host : cloud110 Relocations : (not relocatable) Vendor : obs://build.opensuse.org/home:ang-cz URL : http://gsd.di.uminho.pt/jpo/software/wakeonlan/ Summary : Perl script to wake up computers through Magic Packets Description : This script sends 'magic packets' to wake-on-lan enabled ethernet adapters and motherboards, in order to switch on the called PC. Distribution: home:ang-cz / openSUSE_13.1 thomas@eee-box:~ Regards, Thomas Schäfer
Re: wake on lan / wol with linux in IPv6-LAN (without IPv4)
Am Montag, 15. September 2014, 12:29:45 schrieb Thomas Schäfer: Hi, On Saturday I disabled IPv4 in my home network. ( using DNS64/NAT64 for external things). ( no great discussion about it, it is just a test) But I was surprised by this problem: wol 1C:6F:65:C9:87:46 wol: Cannot send magic packet for '1C:6F:65:C9:87:46' to 255.255.255.255:4: Network is unreachable wakeonlan 1C:6F:65:C9:87:46 Sending magic packet to 255.255.255.255:9 with 1C:6F:65:C9:87:46 send : Network is unreachable at /usr/bin/wakeonlan line 83. Does anybody know a small wol implementation for linux, usable in IPv6-LANs? I found one tool etherwake by Donald Becker. It doesn't use IP/UDP. It makes wol directly on ethernet, but it needs to be run as root. I am still looking for an IPv6-wol (without mono) Thomas
question about IPv6-DNS-nameserver link-local (with Interface-name)
Hi, In my test environment some soho/mobile routers propagate IPv6-link-local-adresses to the client(DNS). In general there is no problem. Opensuse/NetworkManager writes to /etc/resolv.conf nameserver fe80::d27a:b5ff:fe7b:e152%wlan0 (Win7, win8, looks similar with its interface-ID) Ubuntu configures dnsmasq to use this address. So far so good. But not all applications accept this DNS-Resolver. host and dig make problems. I described the Situation here in more details. https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885053 But I am not sure, where is the bug? Is it ok, to assign link-local-addresses in /etc/resolv.conf? or Are host, dig and maybe other apps buggy? (confused by IP-addresses with interface extension) If you try to reproduce my problem - switch off ipv4. Regards, Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: T-Mobile goes IPv6-only on Android 4.4+ devices
Hi, I am looking for source (not android) or compiled packages (deb, rpm) for 464XLAT (clat daemon; plat server). Any hints/links? Thank you, Thoams
slaac/privacy extensions disable at boottime at linux
Hi, more and more linux-distributors switch on privacy extensions by default. In my LAN I have router advertisements on because of dynamically configured mobile devices. But I also have PCs with static addresses. Unfortunately sysctl-rules catch some seconds to late. So the NFS-configuration fails, afterwards postfix fails and so on. My question is: Is there a kernel boot option to disable SLAAC completely or at least the net.ipv6.conf.default.use_tempaddr Regards, Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: A simple test for email via IPv6
Am 30.04.2013 09:28, schrieb Валерий Солдатов: Hello, I wrote a little script-autoresponder, it helps to check delivery of email via IPv6. Simply send an email to t...@mail.v6net.ru. If we get it via IPv6, you will receive a confirmation letter with congratulations. If we get it via IPv4, you will receive an error message about non-existing domain. (MX record for mail.v6net.ru references only to -record). I did such tests in too. (without autoresponder and without public test-service). But the thing is: The Deutsche Telekom hasn't still made their homework. And it comes worse: The second part of your statement is not true. I get no error message, I get no message at all. Normal users would think the email was delivered. May be the Deutsche Telekom is not alone, but that is a bad excuse. Regards, Thomas Schäfer -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
Re: A simple test for email via IPv6
Am 30.04.2013 11:25, schrieb Валерий Солдатов: Hi Thomas, Records in a maillog show that an answer via IPv6 has been send to you, hope you receive it. Sorry if you did not receive. This account works. But I tried also my private account at t-online.de With IPv4 you will get an answer about non-existing domain, but possibly your local smtp-server placed your email in outgoing queue and tries repeately to deliver it. Maybe you will receive a negative answer from it later. May be in seven days or never. That's not your fault. That is the willful ignorance of some ISPs - speak IPv4, or we won't talk to you. Last year the Deutsche Telekom was able to receive emails from IPv6-only-networks. Now they are completely disconnected from the internet, at least from emails point of view. Regards, Thomas -- There’s no place like ::1 Thomas Schäfer (Systemverwaltung) Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Centrum für Informations- und Sprachverarbeitung Oettingenstraße 67 Raum C109 80538 München ☎ +49/89/2180-9706 ℻ +49/89/2180-9701
