Re: Future of the IPv6 CPE survey on RIPE Labs - Your Input Needed

[Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>]

I believe it has to do with IPv6 mechanisms for handling native 
addressing. I haven't had the opportunity to test it myself, but from 
dealing with other vendors, I find that they all support subsets of 
possible configurations. For example, we test the following with each 
CPE device which supports IPv6 and is up for consideration.

1) 6to4 support
2) SLAAC + DHCPv6-PD on bridging wan (haven't found one yet, and I 
believe still the only setup for IOS)
3) DHCPv6 IA_TA requests + DHCPv6-PD (too bad IOS SR doesn't support 
this yet?)
4) Support of RA to determine default route (seen many require manual 
gateway configurations since DHCPv6 won't send a default router option)
5) PPPoE/A with above combinations
6) PPPoE/A unnumbered ptp + DHCPv6-PD
7) /60 and /48 DHCPv6-PD and how they are assigned by the CPE
8) DHCPv6 IA_TA, SLAAC, and DHCPv6-PD support on the device's LAN and 
determining the mechanism it uses
9) Default stateful firewall rules for IPv6.
10) Support for static assignments and routing for IPv6 (many devices 
are still working on dynamic support and have no manual support)

I've yet to find a consumer grade product which meets all of these 
different configurations; especially in the $50 range.


Jack

On 1/26/2011 11:01 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I haven't done exhaustive testing, but, it has to do with certain combinations
> of IPv4 configurations and IPv6 routing do work and other combinations
> don't.
>
> Owen
>
> On Jan 26, 2011, at 4:41 AM, Richard Barnes wrote:
>
> > Could you elaborate?  Which circumstances?
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Owen DeLong<owen () delong com>  wrote:
> > > It works for routing native IPv6 under some circumstances as well.
> > >
> > > Owen
> > >
> > > On Jan 26, 2011, at 12:01 AM, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 26 Jan 2011, Franck Martin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What about an Airport Extreme? It has a wan interface that does PPPOE
> > > > >
> > > > > The IPv6 feature seems working, with 6to4 or static tunnels and a basic IPv6 firewall.
> > > >
> > > > Yes it is. I already reported to Marco.
> > > > http://labs.ripe.net/Members/marco/content-ipv6-cpe-survey
> > > >
> > > > It should be included somehow in a matrix But 6to4 (or other tunneling techniques) is only a substitute of real IPv6.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >        Janos Mohacsi
> > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Mirjam Kuehne"<mir () ripe net>
> > > > > To: nanog () nanog org
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, 25 January, 2011 3:34:14 AM
> > > > > Subject: Future of the IPv6 CPE survey on RIPE Labs - Your Input Needed
> > > > >
> > > > > [apologies for duplicates]
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Based on new information we received since the last publication, we
> > > > > updated the IPv6 CPE matrix:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to make this information more useful for a large user base, we
> > > > > are preparing a detailed survey to gather more structural feedback about
> > > > > the range of equipment that is currently in use. Not only would we like
> > > > > you to participate in this survey, but we also ask for your help in
> > > > > identifying the right survey questions. Please find a call for input on
> > > > > RIPE Labs:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://labs.ripe.net/Members/marco/future-of-the-ipv6-cpe-survey-more-input-needed
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > Mirjam Kuehne&  Marco Hogewoning
> > > > > RIPE NCC