Re: T-Mobile DE IPv6-only APN

2020-02-01 Thread Thomas Schäfer



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

2020-02-01 Thread Thomas Schäfer



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

2018-05-08 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2018-05-07 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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&sl=de&tl=en&u=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: Win10 update CLAT

2017-07-27 Thread Thomas Schäfer
Am Donnerstag, 27. Juli 2017, 19:36:58 CEST schrieb Ross Chandler:

> 
> It should be working on desktops too though because the blurb says “Creators
> Update adds support for 464XLAT on desktops and tablets too.”
> 
> Ross

My interpretation of this sentence is the same. So I tried it today afternoon 
with IPv6-only WIFI and DNS64/NAT64 - but no success for ping 8.8.8.8.

Regards,
Thomas


Re: Fwd: SixXS shutting down 2017-06-06

2017-03-23 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2017-03-06 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2017-03-06 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2016-10-14 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Am 14.10.2016 um 13:57 schrieb Holger Zuleger:

If the delegated prefix changes, you'll be simply postponing the local
communication failure, not prevent it.

Only if the new prefix is different to the old one.


I get never the same prefix! (ISP DTAG, private consumer)





The last year has convinced me that the best user experience is
achieved by having an in-home stable ULA prefix to complement the
ISP-delegated global prefix[es] [if any], and that all the internal
hostnames should resolve to the IPv6 addresses assigned from the ULA
prefix.

Yes, but this is probably a bit different to the AVM behavior. I have in
mind that the default configuration on Fritzboxes is to announce the ULA
*only* if the upstream is down. Then your local active sessions breaks
twice.


The default/recommended(by AVM) behavior is still so.
I agree Tore. I use ULA(permanent on) for local NAS to avoid internal 
interruptions.  (cifs)


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: Linux and ULA support and default route

2016-10-14 Thread Thomas Schäfer
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

2016-10-14 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2016-10-10 Thread Thomas Schäfer

A Question:

Have you a pure Windows?
I have seen, there is third party network management software on my 
device. (Fujitsu Plugfree Network).


I have to remove it to be sure...

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

2016-10-10 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2016-09-29 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2016-09-21 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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?

2016-04-26 Thread Thomas Schäfer

@Jeroen
Thanks for the definition of router and cpe.


But the chain of problems must be long:

dead DNS-resolvers by isp

dead DNS-resolvers not recognized by the "cpe" as a cache resolver

slow/no switch to alternative DNS-resolvers at the enduser device.

All three instances with bad software / without monitoring?

Thanks for sharing this experience.


Thomas








Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

2016-04-26 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2016-03-06 Thread Thomas Schäfer

It works again.

There was a "nice" map:

http://allestörungen.de/stoerung/google/karte/

Thanks,

Thomas Schäfer


google<<>>Deutsche Telekom

2016-03-06 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2015-11-26 Thread Thomas Schäfer
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?

2015-11-12 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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


test-ipv6.com out of service?

2015-11-12 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Hi,

is the this site down?

http://test-ipv6.com/

Some minutes ago it displayed wrong test results. Now it seems to me it 
is down.



Regards,
Thomas


Re: IPv6-misconfigurations

2015-09-29 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Thanks for the answers.

In case of "df" the support was able to solve it.

In case of hs worms, I phoned the webmaster, but he says he is busy and 
has higher priorities.



@Jens

You mentioned DNSSEC. A failed monitoring/unintended misconfiguration of 
that is a nightmare. But this is OT here.



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



IPv6-misconfigurations

2015-09-28 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Hi,

I am observing sometimes very strange ipv6-misconfigurations.

The last two examples are:


www.hs-worms.de

LANG=C wget -6 www.hs-worms.de
converted 'http://www.hs-worms.de' (ANSI_X3.4-1968) -> 
'http://www.hs-worms.de' (UTF-8)

--2015-09-28 15:07:07--  http://www.hs-worms.de/
Resolving www.hs-worms.de (www.hs-worms.de)... 2001:4c80:81:a000::1d
Connecting to www.hs-worms.de 
(www.hs-worms.de)|2001:4c80:81:a000::1d|:80... failed: Connection timed out.

Retrying.

and

www.df.eu

LANG=C wget -6 www.df.eu
converted 'http://www.df.eu' (ANSI_X3.4-1968) -> 'http://www.df.eu' (UTF-8)
--2015-09-28 15:06:56--  http://www.df.eu/
Resolving www.df.eu (www.df.eu)... 2a00:1158:0:100::26
Connecting to www.df.eu (www.df.eu)|2a00:1158:0:100::26|:80... failed: 
Connection refused.


Both examples have an -record and so my assumption also IPv6.


The webmaster of hs-worms doesn't answer.

The webmaster of df I did not ask yet - he is a "hoster" and should have 
some monitoring tools.



My question: Is it right, that all these misconfigurations will fail on 
ISPs using DNS64/NAT64, except the people using 464xlat additionally?



If somebody knows the responsible persons...


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



some mirrors of opensuse-repos seem to be broken

2015-04-17 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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: Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...

2015-02-13 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Why a discussion to drill the firewall with very tricky things?

(it's sound to me like the same sh... stun and other legacy ipv4 horrors.)


In my opinion the firewall should be configurable (unfortunately 
DTAG-speedport-series, including the hybrid-modell dsl/lte can't) by 
upnp or by the user.


Sorry, the thread is slightly off topic. But one of the first questions 
was about "premium" maybe also meaning comfort. There are soho-routers 
with comfortable firewalls, but not the "standard"-models.


And also AVM has one handicap - the integrated vpn doesn't support IPv6.

Thomas




Am 13.02.2015 um 15:22 schrieb Steinar H. Gunderson:

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 02:12:31PM +, Phil Mayers wrote:

As above, depends on how they're using the socket API. As a rule for
UDP connections, you actually have to put *more* work in to see ICMP
errors. It's certainly possible to ignore them.


FWIW, at least on Linux, if you keep doing send() on an UDP connection where
the other end sends ICMP destination unreachable, you'll get errors back
(ECONNREFUSED) eventually, although typically not on every packet you send.

/* Steinar */




--


Re: SV: Why do we still need IPv4 when we are migrating to IPv6...

2015-02-13 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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...

2015-02-12 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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...

2015-02-12 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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...

2015-02-12 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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



www.ipv6.bt.com -- DTAG, question to the routing experts

2015-01-03 Thread Thomas Schäfer
Hi,

I can't reach www.ipv6.bt.com from DTAG 
(2003:63:242d:2c00:beae:c5ff:feb5:2088 and 
2a01:598::815b:da31:a7bc:667e:1438)

from here: 
http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php

it works also from DFN/LRZ.

If I look here http://lg.he.net/ I see /32 networks.

Is it the /32-/48-filter-problem again, or is it something different?


ping6 www.ipv6.bt.com
PING www.ipv6.bt.com(2a00:1a48:10a1::538a:9648) 56 data bytes
>From 2003:0:1803:8268::2 icmp_seq=6 Destination unreachable: No route
^C
--- www.ipv6.bt.com ping statistics ---
8 packets transmitted, 0 received, +1 errors, 100% packet loss, time 7000ms


/usr/sbin/traceroute6 www.ipv6.bt.com
traceroute to www.ipv6.bt.com (2a00:1a48:10a1::538a:9648), 30 hops max, 80 
byte packets
 1  fritz.box (2003:63:242d:2c00:2665:11ff:fe8f:181f)  0.684 ms  1.037 ms  
1.018 ms
 2  * * *
 3  * * *
 4  * * *
 5  * * *
 6  * * *
 7  * 2003:0:1803:8268::2 (2003:0:1803:8268::2)  29.451 ms !N *

Regards,
Thomas





Re: DTAG - routing

2014-12-18 Thread Thomas Schäfer
Thank you for answer and explanation.

I contacted Contabo.

Thomas





DTAG - routing

2014-12-18 Thread Thomas Schäfer
May be somebody has an idea:

thomas@eeebox:~> ping6 devroyal.de
PING devroyal.de(devroyal.de) 56 data bytes
>From 2003:0:1803:8268::2 icmp_seq=1 Destination unreachable: No route
>From 2003:0:1803:8268::2 icmp_seq=4 Destination unreachable: No route
^C
--- devroyal.de ping statistics ---
6 packets transmitted, 0 received, +2 errors, 100% packet loss, time 5000ms

thomas@eeebox:~> /usr/sbin/traceroute6 devroyal.de
traceroute to devroyal.de (2a02:c200:1:10:3:0:6119:1), 30 hops max, 80 byte 
packets
 1  fritz.box (2003:63:241d:ef00:2665:11ff:fe8f:181f)  0.689 ms  0.952 ms  
0.935 ms
 2  * * *
 3  * * *
 4  * * *
 5  * * *
 6  * * *
 7  * 2003:0:1803:8268::2 (2003:0:1803:8268::2)  37.257 ms !N *


>From other networks I have no problems.

Thomas





Routing problem

2014-11-29 Thread Thomas Schäfer
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


Routingproblems - Deutsche Telekom?

2014-11-21 Thread Thomas Schäfer
Hi,

today the "internetsociety" has anounced that linkedin has joined the World 
IPv6 Launch Measurements Project. So far so good (marketing).

But I was confused by using still IPv4.

This company has more than one addresses.

de.linkedin.com has no -Record. Ok, shit happens.

but www.linkedin.com has an -Record.


from home via DSL (Deutsche Telekom) I get this:

ping6 www.linkedin.com
PING www.linkedin.com(2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881) 56 data bytes
>From 2003:0:1803:8268::2 icmp_seq=3 Destination unreachable: No route
>From 2003:0:1803:8268::2 icmp_seq=7 Destination unreachable: No route
^C
--- www.linkedin.com ping statistics ---
8 packets transmitted, 0 received, +2 errors, 100% packet loss, time 16047ms

from work via LRZ/DFN I get this:

ping6 www.linkedin.com
PING www.linkedin.com(2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881: icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=50.4 ms
64 bytes from 2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881: icmp_seq=2 ttl=47 time=50.2 ms
64 bytes from 2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881: icmp_seq=3 ttl=47 time=50.2 ms
64 bytes from 2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881: icmp_seq=4 ttl=47 time=50.2 ms
64 bytes from 2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881: icmp_seq=5 ttl=47 time=50.3 ms
64 bytes from 2620:109:c007:102::5be1:f881: icmp_seq=6 ttl=47 time=50.1 ms
^C
--- www.linkedin.com ping statistics ---
6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 50.199/50.293/50.446/0.158 ms

I found also some other problems in 26 but they are not so prominent.

www.opus1.com
www.ipv6book.ca

Has anybody an idea? Can somebody confirm this problem by using a different 
isp?

Regards,
Thomas






 




Re: wake on lan / wol with linux in IPv6-LAN (without IPv4)

2014-09-17 Thread Thomas Schäfer
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 
> \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




Re: wake on lan / wol with linux in IPv6-LAN (without IPv4)

2014-09-15 Thread Thomas Schäfer
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



wake on lan / wol with linux in IPv6-LAN (without IPv4)

2014-09-15 Thread 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?


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 
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: question about IPv6-DNS-nameserver link-local (with Interface-name)

2014-07-07 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Am 07.07.2014 05:42, schrieb Frank Bulk (iname.com):

Have any of you opened an ISC BIND bug?


Now, I did.

ID is ISC-Bugs #36468.


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



question about IPv6-DNS-nameserver link-local (with Interface-name)

2014-07-01 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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



problem with www.xbox.com / akamai

2014-06-14 Thread Thomas Schäfer
This is a little suspect to me:

(from Deutsche Telekom)

thomas@eee-box:~> ping6 www.xbox.com
unknown host
thomas@eee-box:~> host www.xbox.com
www.xbox.com is an alias for www.gtm.xbox.com.
www.gtm.xbox.com is an alias for wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net.
wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net is an alias for 
wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net.globalredir.akadns.net.
wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net.globalredir.akadns.net is an alias for 
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net.
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has address 92.122.27.141
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has IPv6 address 2a02:26f0:3:181::b04
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has IPv6 address 2a02:26f0:3:186::b04
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has IPv6 address 2a02:26f0:3:185::b04
thomas@eee-box:~> 

the same at a different site:

(from LRZ/DFN)

thomas@diener:~> host www.xbox.com
www.xbox.com is an alias for www.gtm.xbox.com.
www.gtm.xbox.com is an alias for wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net.
wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net is an alias for 
wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net.globalredir.akadns.net.
wildcard.xbox.com-c.edgekey.net.globalredir.akadns.net is an alias for 
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net.
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has address 23.9.212.150
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has IPv6 address 2a02:26f0:3:185::b04
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has IPv6 address 2a02:26f0:3:183::b04
e2820.dspb.akamaiedge.net has IPv6 address 2a02:26f0:3:186::b04
thomas@diener:~> ping6 www.xbox.com
unknown host
thomas@diener

But sometimes it works.

Is it an resolver-problem, or is the network not stable, or is it PEBKAC?

Can anybody confirm this problem, or suggest a better test?

Thomas




fyi

2014-06-13 Thread Thomas Schäfer

http://blog.azure.com/2014/06/11/windows-azures-use-of-non-us-ipv4-address-space-in-us-regions/


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/13/microsoft_runs_out_of_us_ipv4_addresses_for_azure_servers/





Re: 464XLAT CLAT for Linux

2014-03-22 Thread Thomas Schäfer
Am Dienstag, 11. März 2014, 01:27:08 schrieb Tore Anderson:
> Hi list,
> 
> In the hope that someone will find this interesting, and would like to
> test it out: I've just published an implementation of a 464XLAT CLAT for
> Linux at https://github.com/toreanderson/clatd/. 


Well done.

Thanks a lot.

Thomas


Re: Microsoft: Give Xbox One users IPv6 connectivity

2014-03-14 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Am 14.03.2014 08:08, schrieb Marco Sommani:


One can configure exceptions on Fritz!Boxes too: just go to
"Internet>Permit Access>IPv6". The problem is that they just allow
exceptions for individual Interface Identifiers; no way to configure
a "permit all". I'm wondering how many XBOX users are able to find
their Interface ID.



Does anybody know if xbox one uses PE (RFC 4941)?

In that case it is difficult to give permissions. If you release some
"Interface ID", it will change to the next.

Thomas






Re: T-Mobile goes IPv6-only on Android 4.4+ devices

2013-11-06 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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






Re: slaac/privacy extensions disable at boottime at linux

2013-06-25 Thread Thomas Schäfer

Am 25.06.2013 14:10, schrieb Benedikt Stockebrand:

Hi Thomas and list,

Thomas Schäfer  writes:


My question is: Is there a kernel boot option to disable SLAAC
completely or at least the
net.ipv6.conf.default.use_tempaddr


that largely depends on your distribution; try /etc/sysctl.conf for
starters.


That is to  late. Once the PE address is configured, sysctl does only 
avoid to learn/generate the next one. It does not delete the first 
PE-adress. Of course the static address should be preferred, but this is 
not the case.






If you want to fix the actual problem however, I suggest you find the
related init script and make it wait until "ip addr show" on that
interface doesn't show an address to be tentative any longer or marks it
as duplicated.


systemd is also new for me. At the moment I use the compatibility-script 
 /etc/init.d/boot.local for correct/reloading some things, but this ugly.



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



slaac/privacy extensions disable at boottime at linux

2013-06-25 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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

2013-04-30 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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



Re: A simple test for email via IPv6

2013-04-30 Thread Thomas Schäfer

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