ipv6 in network-manager

[Guest]

Hi,

I'm trying to set an IPv6 address, but can't find how to do that in the kubuntu network-manager, only IPv4 addresses. Is there no option to that?

Tks,

Roberto

[Guest]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

OK,

after more searching, I found that ipv6 is a "to do" thing in the KDE network manager:
http://dot.kde.org/2009/11/07/introd...networkmanager

[oshunluvr]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Who uses ipv6 yet

[Snowhog]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Win-blows!

[oshunluvr]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

I should have known...

[GreyGeek]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Pardon me for re-opening this older thread ... but it seems like a good place to do so since it would reactivate "replies to your posts" for those who read it previously.

The supply of IPv4 addresses is estimated to reach exhaustion by June-July of 2011, about 230 days from today, 10/25/2010.

There is an article explaining the IPv6 transition problem for U/Kubuntu users very well,
http://www.linux.com/learn/tutorials...-maverick-1010, but in the context of Comcast's progress in switching to IPv6. Here is a key paragraph:

Tunneling Mechanisms

Due to the lack of backward compatibility with IPv4, IPv6 adoption has been slow. This is where the tunneling mechanisms come in to get the ball rolling and allow IPv6 implementation to gain some momentum. Comcast's plan is a sound one: Phase one, tunnel IPv6 over native IPv4; Phase two, dual stack both IPv6 and IPv4; Phase three, tunnel IPv4 over native IPv6.

The article goes on to explain 6rd tunneling and how to set up Maverick with 6rd tunneling using radvd, which you can download from the repository, and ip6tables, which is already part of your installation (iptables 1.1.4).

The problem with the article is that the 6rd concept uses IPv6 "prefixes", which are specific to ISPs. The article uses the Comcast prefix but my Etherlink ISP has not advertised their prefix. Until they do I cannot use this technique. The same goes with your ISP.


If you do manage to get this method going there is this note of caution about ANY IPv6:

Firewall Your IPv6 Traffic

You may be used to your internal network being on private RFC 1918 address space. Firewalling is still necessary when using NAT but some people neglect to do so assuming the NAT is protection enough. .... using publicly routable IPv6 addresses means firewalling is no longer an option. Any computer on IPv6 can come right into your network without it. If you are familiar with iptables, ip6tables will be a snap to implement.

I've used Linux for 12 years, and only in the last 6 years have I used a firewall, mainly because the distro installed it during installation. Kubuntu is like that. The article supplies a sample bash script with bare minimum ip6tables firewall commands. So, expect SecondLife and VOIP problems as you work out your ip6table firewall setup. Kubuntu ALREADY comes with a minimally configured Iptables firewall. A minimally configured Ip6tables firewall will, no doubt, be automatically installed in the same way, if it hasn't been already. But, I recommend that Linux users make themselves more familiar with gfwui, or Shorewall6 and the like, in order to make sure that hackers cannot become a "local users" user by merely entering your IPv6 address into one of their scripts.

In checking the repository I found several libraries and applications ready for IPv6;
bird6
ipv6calc
6tunnnel
subnetcalc
miredo-*
mrd6
wide-dhcpv6-*
dibbler-*
netcat6
shorewall6
gwc6
radvd
and others.

Another problem is one of hardware on YOUR end. IPv6 is slated to be the default Internet address format by the end of 2012 (if IPv4 addresses can last that long) No doubt your ISP will replace your current modem with one that is IPv6 compatible, if yours is not already. BUT, what about the wireless router setting next to your cable modem? I recently purchased a TR-LW1043N wireless router, which is the best I've ever owned, but after reading this article I check the manual on my 6 month old router. It is NOT IPv6 compatible. I went to Amazon and searched for IPv6 wireless routers. The pickings are slim, just five, and one is over $500 US !! The most inexpensive one, for $32, doesn't explicitly say it is compatible with v6, even though it was in the "IPv6 router" search list.

So, the next year is going to be CHAOTIC, to say the least. I suspect that there will be LOTS of headaches and problems between now and then. It will be a good time to keep your friendly forum handly!

[GreyGeek]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

PS: SJVN has this nice article on the upsides of moving to IPv6.

[dibl]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Bummer. I just reviewed the specs on my wireless router, which is maybe 18 months old (TrendNET TEW-633gr). The term "IPv6" is conspicuously missing ....

Well, I guess we'll just see how Time Warner handles this little drama.

[GreyGeek]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Me too. Earthlink leases TimeWarner cable in my area.

[dibl]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Actually, upon reflection, the "running out of addresses" problem with IPv4 should not ruin life for those who already have one, right? In other words, Time Warner (or whatever ISP) should be able to continue to serve the ones in existence, even after they are unable to accommodate new addresses.

Or so says my simple mind ...

[GreyGeek]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

A system running only IPv4 cannot communicate with one running only IPv6. Read this article to get an idea of how rough some folks think it will be.

Right now, in order to access IPv6 services on the Internet you have to use IPv6 tunneling in IPv4, which is the basis of that URL that I posted today. That's "Phase One". Phase TWO is having TWO separate stacks. Phase Three is tunneling IPv4 in IPv6, which is a lot easier because IPv6 has 128 bits, and poking 32 bits inside 128 bits is easier than the other way around.

Here's the differences:http://www.techsutram.com/2009/03/di...4-vs-ipv6.html
Here is the Widipedia entry on IPv6:

For deployment, IPv6 is largely incompatible with IPv4 at the packet level, and translation services have practical issues that make them controversial.[2] IPv6 and IPv4 are therefore treated as almost entirely separate networks with devices having two separate protocol stacks if they need to access both networks, with tunneling of IPv6 on IPv4 and vice versa.

That's why I said that the next year or two is going to be CHAOTIC. We are going to get a lot of forum msgs complaining that FireFox can't access site "X", or that it is too slow, which we get already get.

Oh, I forgot... the economy is going to make the shift to IPv6 compatible hardware more difficulty and time consuming.

[oshunluvr]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Correct me if I'm wrong:

Since my ISP supplies my router, they will have to (eventually) change my router and/or software to allow IPv6 access or close my account. This may occur at the local (my house) location or could occur at the system (their CO).

My home network - since it's not exposed directly to the internet - will still function fine as an IPv4 network. In actual use - all my internet connections appear as a single IPv4 address which is transparent to the computers and other devices on my network.

In others words, my external IP will be IPv6 but my local IP will be IPv4 and all will be well - excepting maybe typing an external IPv4 address into my browser may fail to locate the site - as long as my router tunnels the IPv6 connection to my IPv4 devices using local ip's.

So it's really a matter of having an internet connected device that can use IPv6 and correct tunneling.

Or not

I can't speak for others, but if the economy causes verizon (my provider) to be able to upgrade my equipment, they'll lose my business. I doubt they'll wait too long to make the required changes.

[GreyGeek]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

So, IF I read you right, you are proposing a "tunneling modem" and/or wireless router? Tunneling in firmware. From the ISP side of the modem out the Internet is IPv6, but from the user's side of the modem and in it is IPv4, with the IPv6 packets broken down (by the modem of the wireless router -- who takes responsibility for that dichotomy?) into a sufficient number of 1500 byte IPv4 packets to carry the info to an IPv4 browser. And sending something back to the internet requires the wireless router or modem to stuff a 1500 byte IPv4 packet into an IPv6 packet.

My home network - since it's not exposed directly to the internet - will still function fine as an IPv4 network. In actual use - all my internet connections appear as a single IPv4 address which is transparent to the computers and other devices on my network.

That is because NAT is used to make sure that local 192.*/10.* addresses are not exposed to the Internet side of the modem. I.e, several 192.168.1.X addresses on your local network are translated to the w.x.y.z address assigned to your modem by your ISP, with your wireless router acting as ipforwarding & masquerading. NAT, in the wireless, would have to translate a 32 bit local IP address to a 128 bit Internet address under IPv6. That would be easy. The hard part would be taking a variable size IPv6 packet and breaking it into a sufficient number of IPv4 packets.

So it's really a matter of having an internet connected device that can use IPv6 and correct tunneling.

Well, yes, IF you are going to put tunneling into firmware. There's the rub. Who is going to make the firmware (wireless or modem mfgr) and how much will they sell it for, and in today's economy who can afford to pay the ransom prices you and I both know they will charge?

Linux already has an IPv6 stack. Here's the amazing part: if one were to connect their PC directly to their cable modem which was making available a connection to an IPv6 Internet the PC would connect automatically with DHCPV6 because there are so many IP addresses available a random address would be generated by stateless auto-negotiation making the odds of any two pieces of equipment being given the same address very remote. The IPv6 space is so large that it makes available 3.4 X 1038 addresses, which would give every person on this planet 4.95 X 1028 addresses each! In fact, each person could be given ((2^(128))/(6,877,412,885⋅70⋅365⋅24⋅60⋅60)) approximately 2 X 1019 addresses to use EACH SECOND of their 70 year life! That's 20,000 per MICRO second.

Or, there are about 7 × 1022 stars in the observable universe. Assume each star had 9 planets and each planet has a population equal to the Earth's, the IPv6 address space would allow each person in the universe to have 78,537 IP addresses, which could be dispensed at a rate of over 1,000 per day for each day of their lives.

Currently, IPv4 gives each person on this planet only 0.6th of an IP address.

IPv4 technology may continue to be used on LANs and other devices using abundantly available IPv4 hardware where address scaling is not an issue but, as you say, there will have to be some tunneling software-device between them and the Internet.

[Ole Juul]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

Presumably the best idea would be to get a router where you can install your own software. I got a WRT54GL specifically to insure that I would have future options, although I haven't needed any yet. What I would worry about is my radio. It identifies itself via telnet as MikroTik v3.30 and I don't know much about the software it runs. Since it cost me $250 I certainly hope the firmware is updatable, but expect my ISP will do that automatically if needed.

That said; since I live in the country the switch probably won't be noticeable for some years to come because AFAIK everyone in the valley has the same outward facing IP and we're all in private address space such as the 10.0.0.0 series. The ISP will probably just need to upgrade a single box to ipv6 and we, the users will never know the difference.

[GreyGeek]

Re: ipv6 in network-manager

You and your valley may not know the difference between what you have now and what you'll have after the rest of the world goes to IPv6, but things like auto-negotiation, variable packet sizes, better use of the bandwidth because it won't require so many packets to play a move or do online gaming... etc...