Frank Monroe
Regular Contributor
And? You said you didn't understand why people are running IPv6. This is an example.This is 5G Internet connection and they want IPv6 for known reasons.
And? You said you didn't understand why people are running IPv6. This is an example.This is 5G Internet connection and they want IPv6 for known reasons.
You said you didn't understand why people are running IPv6
I don't know why you guys bother running dual stack on a home network.
Again, none of this matters. You said you don't understand why people run dual stack, This is an example as to why. I need dual stack so that I can use IPv6 on T-Mobile and also access the devices on my network that do not support IPv6. Sure, I could turn off IPv6 on all my devices. But, like I said, earlier, I will have an extra NAT level and an extra IPv4/IPv6 conversion. BTW, T-Mobile also has fiber home internet.This is a mobile network ISP and they run out of IPv4 addresses fast. T-Mobile customers are complaining about forced IPv6 only. I read about 464 tunnels madness as an attempt to fix the issues. There are still many devices relying on IPv4 like TV's, TV boxes, IoT, etc. Forced IPv6 means you may not be able to use some of your devices anymore. If you have IPv4 option though and it's working, you don't necessarily need IPv6..
I'm curious what benefit you perceive from NOT having IPv6?
When I was a small child I learned in school the United States of America would rapidly adopt the "Metric System", so just like the necessity of IPv6 to "save the Internet" I want to be preparedI don't know why you guys bother running dual stack on a home network. What isn't working with IPv4 only?
I will give you another example. There is a neat DNS filtering/redirection service called ControlD. Some of its features require IPv6. Who knows how many people use this service. But you said, "What isn't working with IPv4 only." Here is another example.Again, none of this matters. You said you don't understand why people run dual stack, This is an example as to why. I need dual stack so that I can use IPv6 on T-Mobile and also access the devices on my network that do not support IPv6. Sure, I could turn off IPv6 on all my devices. But, like I said, earlier, I will have an extra NAT level and an extra IPv4/IPv6 conversion. BTW, T-Mobile also has fiber home internet.
I want to be prepared
Who knows how many people use this service.
I have just flashed 386.4 Beta2 and after reboot the red LED is still on but I have WAN connectivity. Any Ideas?
your shield isn't running kodi 19.3 by chance, is it? I'm having similar occasional issues, but I'm at the last Merlin release on my ac86, so I'm more inclined to think it's that software
I don't know why you guys bother running dual stack on a home network. What isn't working with IPv4 only?
For me, it's more about gaming as IPv6 reportedly (mixed) has less latency as it does away with NAT,
If you are running an AX86U and have your PC connected to the LAN 1 port, switch the Ethernet cable to another port on the router.I have just flashed 386.4 Beta2 and after reboot the red LED is still on but I have WAN connectivity. Any Ideas?
Yes, i am having the same situation on my ax86. In version 386.3.2 this was not the case so it reverted back to 386.3.2. but this was the case at 386,45934. QUOTE="alistair, post: 731911, member: 28443"]
Hi,
after installing 386.4-beta2 on my AX86u, it sometimes happens that the Internet light goes red for a moment. It didn't do that before. Usually the white light only goes red after a boot, before the Internet connection is established. Does this happen for anyone else? The Internet connection isn't lost, while it goes briefly red. That's what's confusing me. It would be awesome to know what it means and why it happens.
My apologies, if someone already spoke about this, I didn't read all 19 pages.
I have not seen this on my router.Thanks, so at least that's "normal" with this version and not just my device.
Your issue seems to be related to Let's Encrypt trying to update the DDNS entry (it needs to push a validation value to Asus's DNS server for validation purposes). Might be possible that this portion of the code isn't working properly at this time.All I can say - and have said in prior posts in this thread - is that if I revert to stock 386-45934 - the RT-AX86U gets its IPv6 address without delay and DDNS works a treat.
I have a shortened extract from my beta2 log if it helps ...
9288cd8c05 Updated documentation
8c0194de99 inadyn: rc: disable IPv6 support
0ae53e9cd8 rc: harmonized with upstream
969b828b98 busybox: enable hexdump applet
cf0307f1d2 rc: add missing chain to ip6tables's filter table
797f3e4ba9 httpd: webui: improve parameter sanitization (backport from Asus upstream)
f672e3199a Bumped to beta 3
I got tired of letsencrypt, I took the acme.sh and mounted the latest version of acme.sh ontop of the one provided in asuswrt merlin and I use zerossl using their newer support for it.Your issue seems to be related to Let's Encrypt trying to update the DDNS entry (it needs to push a validation value to Asus's DNS server for validation purposes). Might be possible that this portion of the code isn't working properly at this time.
That might explain why it worked for my test setup - no Let's Encrypt on it (and testing that would be difficult, since to be able to test anything related to IPv6 I have to put the test router in a dual NAT setup behind a Linux router that handles IPv6 PD.).
I'm disabling IPv6 support for now. Hardly worth delaying this release by weeks for a new feature that has very limited usefulness at this time.
@RMerlin For those of us that are unaffected by any associated issues on Beta 2, does that ^ mean:Your issue seems to be related to Let's Encrypt trying to update the DDNS entry (it needs to push a validation value to Asus's DNS server for validation purposes). Might be possible that this portion of the code isn't working properly at this time. That might explain why it worked for my test setup - no Let's Encrypt on it (and testing that would be difficult, since to be able to test anything related to IPv6 I have to put the test router in a dual NAT setup behind a Linux router that handles IPv6 PD.). I'm disabling IPv6 support for now. Hardly worth delaying this release by weeks for a new feature that has very limited usefulness at this time.
8c0194de99 inadyn: rc: disable IPv6 support
Your issue seems to be related to Let's Encrypt trying to update the DDNS entry (it needs to push a validation value to Asus's DNS server for validation purposes). Might be possible that this portion of the code isn't working properly at this time.
That might explain why it worked for my test setup - no Let's Encrypt on it (and testing that would be difficult, since to be able to test anything related to IPv6 I have to put the test router in a dual NAT setup behind a Linux router that handles IPv6 PD.).
I'm disabling IPv6 support for now. Hardly worth delaying this release by weeks for a new feature that has very limited usefulness at this time.
Welcome To SNBForums
SNBForums is a community for anyone who wants to learn about or discuss the latest in wireless routers, network storage and the ins and outs of building and maintaining a small network.
If you'd like to post a question, simply register and have at it!
While you're at it, please check out SmallNetBuilder for product reviews and our famous Router Charts, Ranker and plenty more!