|
122
|
pfSense English Support / IPv6 / Re: IPv6 testing
|
on: February 03, 2011, 11:46:54 am
|
That stuff with mounting with sftp is already beyond my level of Linux knowledge
Did you compare your ifconfig gif0 and the ifconfig of your LAN and WAN with my output as seen on the screenshots above? I'm wondering if I'm missing something there.
Could you perhaps compare the settings from your pfSense configuration using the pfSense web GUI?
First a little OT: Mounting with sftp is something I only know how to do because until recently, it was the only way to work directly on a clients' ftp-server when building websites. It uses a gui-application called Expandrive, but recently it's become possible in the venerable Transmit as well. I did glance at your output, but I don't know what to look for. As far as I can tell, your output look pretty much the same as mine. The settings from my pfSense configuration in the GUI are as follows, and very much the same as yours. In fact, the only difference I can see, is the three characters following :1f14:. Interfaces -> WANIPv6
Enable Interface is checked Type: Static IPv6 MAC address: empty MTU: empty MSS: empty IPv6 address: 2001:470:1f14:xxx::2/128 Gateway: HE_NET - 2001:470:xxxx:xxx::1
Both private network blocking options checked.
System -> Routing -> Gateways -> HE_NET
Interface: WANIPV6 Name: HE_NET Gateway: 2001:470:xxxx:xxx::1 Default gateway is checked Monitor IP: empty Description: HE.NET gateway
Interfaces -> (assign) -> GIF
Parent interface: WAN gif remote address: 216.66.84.46 gif tunnel local address: 2001:470:xxxx:xxx::2 gif tunnel remote address: 2001:470:xxxx:xxx::1 / 64 Route caching is not checked ECN firendly behaviour is not checked Description: HE.net ipv6 tunnel
|
|
|
|
|
123
|
pfSense English Support / IPv6 / Re: IPv6 testing
|
on: February 03, 2011, 10:51:34 am
|
Where is this config.xml located? Can I simply edit it using vi at the console? Could you show me a sample of what you put in there?
Could you perhaps have a look at the screenshots I posted earlier today with the output of my network interfaces and compare those with yours? Maybe I'm missing something crucial in the interface config.
What ISP are you on anyway?
Are you using pfSense behind NAT or directly attachted to your internet line with a public IP?
Config.xml can be found in /cf/conf/config.xml As you can see in the picture below, I mounted sftp directly in the Finder because I felt it was easier than using the terminal and especially cp and vi. Then, I edited the xml file directly, did a search for gateway and tried a few different things. As you can see in the images attached, I ended up with this and it works for me. I've also attached the v6 part of the output of netstat -rn on my pfSense installation, not sure what everything means. Gif is the tunnel, lo0 is the loopback, reX are my interfaces and I run both an openvpn and a pptp server, so those are mentioned as well. Internet6: Destination Flags Netif Expire default 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::1 UGS gif0 ::1 ::1 UH lo0 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::1 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::2 UH gif0 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::/64 link#2 U re1 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::1 link#2 UHS lo0 fe80::%re0/64 link#1 U re0 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%re0 link#1 UHS lo0 fe80::%re1/64 link#2 U re1 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef9%re1 link#2 UHS lo0 fe80::%re2/64 link#3 U re2 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efa%re2 link#3 UHS lo0 fe80::%re3/64 link#4 U re3 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efb%re3 link#4 UHS lo0 fe80::%re4/64 link#5 U re4 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efc%re4 link#5 UHS lo0 fe80::%re5/64 link#6 U re5 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efd%re5 link#6 UHS lo0 fe80::%lo0/64 link#8 U lo0 fe80::1%lo0 link#8 UHS lo0 fe80::%gif0/64 link#11 U gif0 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%gif0 link#11 UHS lo0 fe80::%ovpns1/64 link#12 U ovpns1 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%ovpns1 link#12 UHS lo0 fe80::%pptpd0/64 link#13 U pptpd0 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%pptpd0 link#13 UHS lo0 ff01:1::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%re0 U re0 ff01:2::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef9%re1 U re1 ff01:3::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efa%re2 U re2 ff01:4::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efb%re3 U re3 ff01:5::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efc%re4 U re4 ff01:6::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efd%re5 U re5 ff01:8::/32 ::1 U lo0 ff01:b::/32 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::2 U gif0 ff01:c::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%ovpns1 U ovpns1 ff01:d::/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%pptpd0 U pptpd0 ff02::%re0/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%re0 U re0 ff02::%re1/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef9%re1 U re1 ff02::%re2/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efa%re2 U re2 ff02::%re3/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efb%re3 U re3 ff02::%re4/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efc%re4 U re4 ff02::%re5/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2efd%re5 U re5 ff02::%lo0/32 ::1 U lo0 ff02::%gif0/32 2001:470:xxxx:xxxx::2 U gif0 ff02::%ovpns1/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%ovpns1 U ovpns1 ff02::%pptpd0/32 fe80::290:7fff:fe32:2ef8%pptpd0 U pptpd0
As for my ISP and connection: A few months now, I've been using Ziggo so at least you know that your ISP isn't the problem. pfSense is my NAT, so it has a public v4 address. Images:   
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
pfSense English Support / IPv6 / Re: IPv6 testing
|
on: February 03, 2011, 10:17:08 am
|
Would you be willing to help me troubleshoot?
Of course I'm willing to help, but I fear that I have may have inadvertently led you to believe that I am rather more proficient at all this than I am. As I wrote in an earlier post, I simply followed the steps that Databeestje wrote up in his howto but sidestepped the issues I ran into somewhat. The issue that I had, was that I couldn't get past the part of the howto telling me to edit the gateway as pfSense complained that the v6 address that I entered was outside the chosen interface subnet. I skipped that step for the time being and finished the howto. Then, I manually edited the gateway in the config.xml file on my pfSense machine and entered the proper v6 address. Having done that I was able to select the gateway in the WANIPv6 interface and the tunnel became operational. Also, I'm coming from the Mac OS X world, so all this Linux (well, BSD Unix really) stuff is fairly unknown territory for me as well!
|
|
|
|
|
125
|
pfSense English Support / IPv6 / Re: IPv6 testing
|
on: February 03, 2011, 07:33:48 am
|
Can't believe it did work for some people. They must have done something different. I'm wondering what.
You are right that some people did something different. I was having the wrong subnet error when trying to add the gateway, so I edited the config.xml file directly using expandrive to mount the sftp as a drive and editing the file directly so I could see whether my edits were having the desired effect. Having added the gateway manually, the tunnel came online and I was able to add the gateway to the interface WANIPv6 as is shown in the guide. Lastly, I added the anycasted he.net ipv6 dns server to the dns server list in general. The result is a 10/10 score on http://test-ipv6.com/ and a generally fast IPv6 internet connection (20/8 mbits). Also, lots of rebooting! images: (sorry about the white space)  
|
|
|
|
|
126
|
pfSense English Support / IPv6 / Re: Comcast has started rolling out IPv6 for it's customers
|
on: February 01, 2011, 02:27:17 am
|
One of the largest cable internet ISPs in the Netherlands called Ziggo still has no plans for IPv6. This is pretty much the trend for internet providers it seems.
Some detective work has found that their ASN in the routing table does not even have a IPv6 prefix. That's just plain dumb. There are places you can start.
You are right when you say that Ziggo is just plain dumb when it comes to IPv6. I'm in the same boat and when I called Ziggo about this (and a few other things) a month or so back, they were about as cynical as you can imagine. In short they think it's not going to be a problem for them as they have enough IPv4 addresses to last them a few more years. Other ISP's in the Netherlands aren't doing much better, though XS4ALL is the notable exception. I believe I read somewhere (tweakers.net?) that most of the new fiber providers are running dual stack by default, so shiny new consumer/SMB ISP's such as Zeelandnet, Surfnet, Solcom, Tweak and Lijbrandt may be our best bet for the future when it comes to speed and IPv6 in the Netherlands. If I'm wrong and they aren't running dual stack, it is far more likely that 'we' as users can persuade them to implement it because they are still small as a company. That, and of course the fact that IANA is set to run out of IPv4 addresses today or tomorrow will help as the price of IPv4 addresses will probably skyrocket.
|
|
|
|
|
128
|
pfSense English Support / Packages / Re: ifBWStats package
|
on: January 26, 2011, 02:38:05 am
|
|
Simply removing ifbwstats.inc and ifbwstats.xml from /usr/local/pkg and using the option to reinstall all packages 'removes' ifbwstats more or less from the packages system. That is to say, at least to such an extent that it no longer presents a problem when, for instance, upgrading to the latest snap.
|
|
|
|
|
129
|
pfSense English Support / IPv6 / IPv6 testing
|
on: January 25, 2011, 05:10:39 pm
|
When I try get the gateway under routing. The box wont let me input the ipv6 address that i got from he.net. It says the subnet is not within the range. If I leave the gateway blank and click save, it puts the ipv6 address that i try to manually enter.
When creating the WANIP6 interface after creating the gateway, I don't get an option to select the gateway.. Only option is none.
Cino, did you manage to solve this before you did a fresh install? I seem to be running into the same problem, but a fresh install isn't feasible at the moment. Also, Databeestje: Awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
130
|
pfSense English Support / Hardware / Re: Successful Install on Watchguard Firebox X700!
|
on: January 25, 2011, 03:08:50 am
|
looks good! i can pick up the same 40mm local for 4.95 so i think i will do this and find a nice 60 for the cpu.
also what app is that on ur iphone?
Thank you, I must say that I'm quite pleased with the way this mod turned out. The app I'm using to measure sound pressure is called SPL meterNote that it's likely that a 60 won't fit exactly (as it will be somewhat too large), and that you'll have to use some tricks to seat it properly.
|
|
|
|
|
132
|
Retired / 2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED / Re: Stuck with 'An upgrade is currently in progress.'
|
on: January 24, 2011, 05:28:12 am
|
It would seem that I've also hit this issue. After a successful update yesterday evening, pfSense presents a 'firmware upgrade ongoing' type of message after logging in.  No amount of rebooting through ssh or even a hard poweroff seems to alleviate the issue. Fortunately, services haven't been interrupted and I can still upgrade firmware through ssh. Hopefully, this will be fixed in a future firmware version.
|
|
|
|
|
133
|
pfSense English Support / Hardware / Re: Successful Install on Watchguard Firebox X700!
|
on: January 19, 2011, 06:55:30 am
|
I searched the thread for quiet fans, and the one link posted for overclockers UK does not work; does anyone have any model numbers for quiet fans? I'd rather not make holes in the box, so would prefer fans that fit the current formation
For my each of my fireboxes I used three Scythe 40 mm Fan Mini Kaze fans (SY124010L) as replacements for the three fans in the back and a larger Papst 60 mm Fan (612FL) as the cpu cooler. The Scythes have a different connector, so I had to reuse the original firebox cables. The Papst really isn't meant to be used the way I'm using them, but I cut out a part in the side of the fan, in effect creating the same airflow as the original firebox cpu fan. Also, the circumference of the Papst is 5 mm larger than the original fan, which actually helps circulation. Both my fireboxes have been functioning for about six months while being cooled in this fashion with no problems even under somewhat heavy load. dB pressure per firebox has gone from ±71.3 to ±44.2 after replacing the fans.
|
|
|
|
|
134
|
pfSense English Support / Hardware / Re: Lcd not working on watchguard x700 with pfsense 2.0
|
on: January 18, 2011, 05:27:18 am
|
I'm running Jan 13th in my X750E. No problems. I haven't installed the lcd package but I have used the mount RW script and it works.
Steve
It does work, but in my case I had to comment out the mount r/w and mount read only from the script as I am running a full install. Perhaps that's what is happening to Jdetmold as well?
|
|
|
|
|
135
|
Retired / 2.0-RC Snapshot Feedback and Problems - RETIRED / Re: DNSSEC on pfSense
|
on: January 14, 2011, 06:54:51 am
|
There are so many different conflicting views scattered around the web.
Thank you for those links, it is very interesting to see the debate on which next-generation dns protocol to use. However, if it is true that dnssec functions as a 30x multiplier for udp packets and the replies can be reflected to a different address, then that would be Very Bad Indeed. Or am I mistaken in assuming this?
|
|
|
|
|
|