Beta Asuswrt-Merlin 386.4 beta is now available

[Frank Monroe]

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.

 

[Murat Y]

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.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Tech9]

You said you didn't understand why people are running IPv6

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 don't know why you guys bother running dual stack on a home network.

 

[Frank Monroe]

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..

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.

 

[CriticJay]

I'm curious what benefit you perceive from NOT having IPv6?

For those of us in North America, dual-stack IPv6 on a home network is yet another "solution looking for a problem" (lol, stole my own phrase from another thread).

I do understand that some parts of the world, mostly in Asia and Europe, may actually need IPv6 and/or dual-stack.

 

[Clark Griswald]

I don't know why you guys bother running dual stack on a home network. What isn't working with IPv4 only?

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 prepared

Beta working flawlessly both hardwired and wireless!

 

[Frank Monroe]

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 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.

 

[Tech9]

I want to be prepared

Are you? You have only built another entrance door to your home so far. This one is harder to lock.

Who knows how many people use this service.

let's move to another thread and discuss what is working and what isn't, as well as security options.

Dual Stack home network pros and cons

Here, let's discuss the pros and cons of dual stack IPv4 and IPv6 home network. I personally have IPv6 disabled on my firewall for easier control and security reasons. My ISP provides 2x external IPv4 addresses as well as 4x IPv6 addresses. I would like to hear the benefits of running dual...

www.snbforums.com

 

[Kabouter Plop]

I have just flashed 386.4 Beta2 and after reboot the red LED is still on but I have WAN connectivity. Any Ideas?

dns unreachable will do that

 

[doodlenoodle]

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

No Kodi app installed on my shield, I use Emby/Plex to handle all my local media or the mainstream streaming apps for entertainment, some side loaded apps as well. Other than my original post, my shield hasn't disconnected since and remains stable.

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, plus when running multiple gaming consoles at home and playing the same game with my kids or friends under the same roof we're not disconnecting each other when joining the same multiplayer lobby, otherwise under IPv4 I have to port forward one port to console A and a different port to console B and so forth to work around that, it's been less of a hassle in my experience.

 

[explorer200]

For me, it's more about gaming as IPv6 reportedly (mixed) has less latency as it does away with NAT,

fractional nanoseconds

 

[bbunge]

I have just flashed 386.4 Beta2 and after reboot the red LED is still on but I have WAN connectivity. Any Ideas?

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.

 

[alistair]

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.

Thanks, so at least that's "normal" with this version and not just my device.

 

[AntonK]

Thanks, so at least that's "normal" with this version and not just my device.

I have not seen this on my router.

 

[RMerlin]

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 ...

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]

Updated to Beta 3. Changes since Beta 2:

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

 

[SomeWhereOverTheRainBow]

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.

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.

 

[learning_curve]

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:
Disabling IPv6 DDNS support only to Asus DDNS, or,
Disabling IPv6 DDNS support to all DDNS providers including Asus, or,
Disabling IPv6 support in total? (unlikely... but the text says: "I'm disabling IPv6 support for now")
Just checking in advance of a move to Beta 3, because as previously posted, I've had no issues at all with IPv6 or IPv6 DDNS (via No-IP) or Let's Encrypt (having re-issued the SSL Certificate) when using Beta2.

Edit: Yes I did see the line in the earlier post (below) & the inadyn ref, but just wanted to be sure

8c0194de99 inadyn: rc: disable IPv6 support

 

[MattMofDoom]

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.

Thanks - this seems to explain testing that I performed yesterday, where I did a factory reset and then progressively configured the router until it 'lost' its IPv6. I couldn't quite correlate it to Lets Encrypt - I knew it happened somewhere around there as one of the last configs, but didn't quite connect the dots.

I'll test with beta 3 now.

 

[MattMofDoom]

GT-AX11000 updated to Beta 3, and Let's Encrypt promptly registered, DDNS working, and I can see IPv6 addresses allocated. Looking good.

RT-AX88U mesh node also updated to Beta 3, fwiw. Obviously don't expect a difference to the result.

IPv6 test below - all appears happy.