The shortcuts for LAN subnet etc. do not currently expand to the 2 LAN subnets yet. That is not yet finished.

Turns out the new dhcp6 client binary was not included in the copy list.

Need to check if it's included now.

Ok, that response is a bit silly.

I changed out the WIDE dhcp6 client for the ISC client, it appears to work on a VM here including prefix delegation, but it will need more testing.

See if this helps your situation.

Client has not been replaced yet. I have not managed to put in the time yet.

June this year actually, for world IPv6 day. So that kind of backfired.

there is 3 more months in this year, so a new Beta, then yes, RC, maybe, release, i don't know.

Negative, we won't be spending that on that, there are a number of far higher priority issues that need ipv6 support.

And nat isn't one, NPt essential failover functionality, so that was added. The input validation is broken though.

Yes. the length must be the same for the WAN and LAN, but you can do smaller lengths, but the smallest is the common denominator.

hi bkraptor,

i'll have a look this week if time permits. I might be able to do random prefixes with the cisco 1811 I have here.

I'm still quite amazed that ISPs think that handing out random addresses and even more so, random IPv6 prefixes is a good idea. It wrecks so much havoc because the LAn addressing changes as well.

Would you mind contacting your ISP if they are considering handing out "static" IPv6 addresses? I know they want to keep their (old) business model they applied to IPv4 addresses going, but the impact in IPv6 is far worse then in IPv4 where just the router changes addresses.

It is not so strange as it sounds. If the choice is 4 through layers of nat and indirection. Or unencumbered 6. Sounds like the better deal.

Your gateway can be a link local address. There is no harm in specifiying the gateway as a link local or global address since it is the same host.

It makes perfect sense for gateways since these are normally always directly connected.

I'm sorry but enabling privacy extensions on a router does not make any sense. You will want to enable these on your clients.

Without any motivation the request is denied, move on. Routing works just fine.

Note: Some ISPs will allocate you a /48 and assign the 1st 0000 subnet to the directly connected interface. They will likely also have a static route that points the /48 to the ::2 address. This is what your downstream router needs to be addressed as.

You configure the 1st /64 you got allocated on the WAN.
You configure the <prefix>:0::/2 on the WAN, /64 or /126 does not specifically matter.
You configure a network out of <prefix> other then 0 on the LAN, for example give the LAN address <prefix>:1::1/64
Go to the DHCPv6 server page, select assisted, enable DHCPv6 server too.

All clients should now pick this up on the LAN in about 10 seconds.

If you have more interfaces you can configure other <prefix>:n::/64 networks locally. 2-ffff.
If you have a internal router, create a static route for <prefix>:nn00::/56 to this router so you repeat the steps above.

Note 2: this has nothing to do with pfSense perse, this is basic subnetting 101. Let the NAT go folks. It isn't there.

Contact the ISP, they will allocate a prefix and route (a /48 for example) to your IPv6 WAN address.

Uninstall the package that is overwriting your menu file. The widescreen package is known to do this.

no time yet