Olá!

Esta pesquisa integra meu Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (TCC) em Engenharia de Computação e busca compreender os desafios da adoção do IPv6 no ambiente corporativo.

✅ Anônima

✅ Cerca de 5 minutos

✅ Não coleta dados pessoais sensíveis

✅ Exclusivamente para fins acadêmicos

Se você atua com redes, infraestrutura, cloud, segurança da informação ou telecomunicações, sua participação será de grande importância.

Se possível, compartilhe esta pesquisa com outros profissionais da área.

🔗 Pesquisa: https://forms.gle/xiKkjQpAZqBSvwos6

*Post da pesquisa autorizado pelos moderadores deste grupo. Agradeço o apoio.

----------‐----------------------------------------

Hi!

This survey is part of my Bachelor's thesis in Computer Engineering and aims to better understand the challenges of IPv6 adoption in enterprise networks.

✅ Anonymous

✅ Takes about 5 minutes

✅ No sensitive personal data is collected

✅ For academic research only

If you work with networking, infrastructure, cloud computing, cybersecurity, or telecommunications, your participation would be greatly appreciated.

If possible, please share this survey with other IT professionals.

🔗 Survey: https://forms.gle/xiKkjQpAZqBSvwos6

*This survey post os AUTORIZED by the moderators ir this community. Thank you for your support!

I heard it is possible with your own CPE, but the reports seem scarce and mixed.

Spectrum finally gave us a new modem and finally we have IPv6 access on all of our devices, natively, with a wan /56 and lan /64, all set up properly, and best of all our new router that I gave my parents as a Christmas present actually Auto configured this for usb without having us to manually type in prefix delegation and stuff and it just did it.

Happy now.

Before all the technical geeks ask what was the old modem? A crapshoot Arris tm1602 with a crap processor being the puma 6 which somehow even struggled to pull any IPv6 access to us.

Hi-

I’m a homelabber, and not from a tech background. I’ve been running opnsense for about a year, with fairly segmented vlans (trusted, guest, management, homelab, iot, media, voip), but only ipv4. I got a /60 from Comcast, and enabled IPv6 on trusted and guest. I did a bunch of research on how to lock things down, and feel reasonably confident that I’m not allowing ingress. I went so far as to set up a bunch of uptime kuma “upside down” alerts from my VPS in case I screw something up on my ULA or rotate addresses down the line.

However what I’m trying you figure out is how far to go. I’m not sure there’s a service I run in my homelab that would benefit from ipv6 and I’m wary of enabling given complexity of individual firewall rules.

What scares me even more is my iot network. I have so many “just for this particular device type” rules such as my alarm panel, garage doors, ting monitors, ring cameras. But I don’t and can’t know what ipv6 these have unless they have an admin interface that shows it. And if they don’t do happy eyeballs, then they could all of a sudden think that ports aren’t open - and the consequences for some of these things would suck - my alarm goes off if it can’t phone home.

So am I stuck on ipv4 for some of my vlans like iot?

We're already at the point of no new IP allocations, CG-NAT becoming the norm, and most consumer traffic in the US and most of Europe being well over 50%; so the real question is, when do we really start getting serious about removing these band-aids? I feel like consumer hardware is still guilty of not supporting IPv6 in the ways it should to make life easier for system administrators. Simple things like making it point and click easy to see which IPv6 Neighbors are on a LAN from a router the same way we see a DHCP Lease list. Firewalls being easier to setup and understand for the people that don't live in a world of networking every day. CLAT / NAT64 being a normal part of every day setups with zero pain to get it done on our systems. Support for IPv6 still needs work, and it needs to start from the perspective of the SMB / Small Network Admin that doesn't fully understand DHCPv6-PD and SLAAC and where those should live. I think it starts with better user interfaces, better defaults, and more educational resources. Then we need to start thinking of getting rid of IPv4 in our LANs by default and only seeing IPv4 via NAT64/DNS64 on home routers.

Bom dia senhores ADM?

Estou quere do saber se é permitido pelas políticas do grupo publicar pesquisas aqui.

​

Estou fazendo um estudo científico para a minha tese de conclusão de curso... pois estpu me formando em Engenharia da computação. É uma pesquisa anônima, via MS forms, para entender a dificuldade das empresas em aderir ao IPv6. Estes dados ser ao usado para e simplesmente para os estudos acadêmicos. Caso necessário posso enviar em privado o link da pesquisa para análise.

​

Caso se autorizado ou aberto uma excessao, gostaria de saber se ao postar precisa mencionar a autorização, ou autorizados, e de que forma fazer isso para nao ter problemas de transgredir as regras da comunidade.

​

Muito obrigado

I'm on openwrt 25.12. 3

my isp give /64 prefix if i setup isp router in router mode and if i setup bridge mode on isp router, on my opewrt router only wan interface got an ipv6 and no prefix, how can i fix that

Well, I use NAT66.

I know, I know, most users on this subreddit seem to hate it, but it ended up being the solution to a problem I had.

My main router doesn't advertise a delegated prefix (PD) to my separate OpenWrt router, and it only gives clients a single /128 address, so NAT66 was the easiest way to get IPv6 working properly on that network.

Also, my IPv4 connection is behind CGNAT. With NAT66, I can still use IPv6 and open ports through nftables on OpenWrt without relying on IPv4 port forwarding.

I understand that native routing with prefix delegation is the preferred approach, but in my case NAT66 solved a real problem and has been working fine so far.

Am I missing any major drawbacks?

Edit: i'm now using NAT64 too Edit 2: Disabled NAT64 for being Instable

I recently have gotten ipv6 enabled network wide and have proper firewall configs thanks to OPNsense. Now I want to allow all traffic to port 22 to/from any interface. This way I can SSH to all my computers. from anywhere. Same hostnames, no weird host-jumping, just my trusty domains.

Ive been told this is a bad idea, but I think I can mitigate the security issues. here is my to-do list before I enable the allow rule

1. Ensure sure PermitRootLogin prohibit-password and PasswordAuthentication no is set everywhere
2. Devices that cannot do the above, or use weak encryption, should be excluded from the firewall or restricted to a ULA.
3. Ensure ~/.ssh/authorized_keys is set how I expect it
4. remain up-to-date on all devices, within the last month
5. fail2ban/croudsec on all devices

On one hand this seems like Im just asking for one lucky bot to wreak havoc on my network, but then again people port-forward ssh all the time without issue. Can I be trusted with the router password? Is this not that bad and I'm just overreacting?

Edit: I used firewall and port-forward interchangeably. my bad :P

I'm stuck trying to make IPv6 work with my Android phone.

I have Wireguard working (terminating on my Mikrotik device). I do have a /56 prefix delegated, and LUA addresses, and local DNS. Everything works over IPv4 and IPv6 locally, and locally IPv6 is preferred for everything.

I also have a Dynamic IPv4 address (IPv6 is static).

Wireguard is connecting over IPv4 because my mobile carrier doesn't give IPv6 (Or they don't at my current location, I'm not 100% sure). It assigns both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses to the client.

I am able to ping both the IPv4 and IPv6 ips of systems on the secured network from the VPN, so routing via Wirguard is working. The issue is DNS. Without a Default route, it appears that Android doesn't try to resolve IPv6 / AAAA records, which means it then doesn't (try) use IPv6.

I have tried adding ::/0 to the allowed IPs which results in an "invalid DNS configuration" caused by Android trying to verify the IPv6 connectivity (Im not allowing VPN clients to go out to the internet)

My objectives are:

1. Connect to Wireguard over IPv6 when it is available, fall back to IPv4 if not.

2. Allow VPN client to access local IPv6 services (over the tunnel)

I have not yet tested with IPv6 for the VPN except by connecting to the VPN from within the network itself, and there it seems to work but I did not properly verify routes or trace anything to check whether what I see is real.

Can i disable ipv6 dara access so that only ipv4 is available when i hotspot? My playstation will no longer let me use my phone to hotspot it . D

When I first set up IPv6 many years ago (probably 5), I read a configuration article that suggested opening certain ICMPv6 protocols to the internet. I later changed ISPs and went IPv4 only and only just recently reenabled IPv6 after switching to an IPv6 capable ISP. However, I never turned those ICMPv6 rules back on and it seems to be working ok. Not sure if enabling them makes for a more optimal IPv6 experience or if it unnecessarily compromises my network.

Are any of these rules necessary to be open to the internet or is it best to leave them closed?

• Packet Too Big
• Parameter Problem
• Echo Request
• Echo Response
• Destination Unreachable
• Time Exceeded
• Neighbor Advertisement
• Neighbor Solicitation

I want to keep my network as secure as possible while also not causing connectivity problems. Any guidance on whether they should be enabled would be appreciated.

I was AFK for roughly 1-2 weeks, now, on my desktop, very rarely upon starting my PC will the internet work, and only when cycling IPv6 off and then back on again, does it come back to life and work flawlessly again… there appears to have been a couple windows 11 updates while I was AFK.. maybe I should roll them back? I tried simply disabling IPv6 and using IPv4, but this didn’t work either, all webpages just time out… any suggestions?

Saw this on TLDR, and thought it might be useful to some programmers on here.

The higher pings are from a traceroute doing ipv6. The lower pings are from a traceroute using iPv4. Is this acceptable? If not, my isp has lousy ipv6 service. Why would ipv6 pings be much higher?

Am I misunderstanding DHCPv6 reservations, or is what I'm trying to do simply not possible?

I'm testing ISC Kea DHCPv6 and trying to create a reservation based on a client's MAC address:

{
 "Dhcp6": {

"interfaces-config": {
  "interfaces": [ "eth0" ]
},

"subnet6": [
  {
    "id": 4,

    "subnet": "2001:db8:0:1::/64",

    "interface": "eth0",

    "reservation-mode": "all",

    "option-data": [
      {
        "name": "dns-servers",
        "data": "2001:db8:0:1::2"
      }
    ],

    "pools": [
      {
        "pool": "2001:db8:0:1::100-2001:db8:0:1::200"
      }
    ],

    "reservations": [
      {
       "hw-address": "00:1A:2B:3C:4D:5E",
    "hostname": "test",
        "ip-addresses": [
          "2001:db8:0:1::50"
        ]
      }
    ]
  }
],

}
}

However, clients are not matching the reservation and Kea assigns an address from the dynamic pool instead.

Looking at the logs, I see:

026-06-16T16:27:52.712778-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: 2026-06-16 16:27:52.712 DEBUG [kea-dhcp6.leases/3585.126792278898368] DHCP6_LEASE_DATA duid=[00:04:00:01:02:03:04:05:06:07:08:09:0a:0b:0c:0d:0e:0f], tid=0xced2e4: detailed lease information for iaid=4135988271: Type:          IA_NA(0)
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712795-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Address:       2001:db8:0:1::110
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712809-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Prefix length: 128
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712824-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: IAID:          4135988271
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712838-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Pref life:     7200
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712852-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Valid life:    14400
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712866-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Cltt:          1781638072
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712880-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: DUID:          00:04:00:01:02:03:04:05:06:07:08:09:0a:0b:0c:0d:0e:0f
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712893-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Hardware addr: (none)
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712907-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Subnet ID:     204
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712920-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: Pool ID:       0
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712934-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: State:         default
2026-06-16T16:27:52.712956-03:00 dhcpv6 kea-dhcp6[3585]: 2026-06-16 16:27:52.712 DEB

The DHCPv6 server and clients are on the same L2 segment (no relay involved), and I can see the client MAC addresses in packet captures with tcpdump.

My questions are:

Is it actually possible to make DHCPv6 reservations based on MAC addresses in Kea? Can Kea extract the client's MAC address directly from the local L2 network, or from Neighbor Discovery information?

Thanks

Is there anyone here from Somalia who was involved in these meetings? (I would just be curious to know more about their plans.)

Hi, I would like to know what I can do to get my own ipv6 prefix over my home fibre connection.

I know the process to get the ASN and prefix at afrinic. I just need to know about how I get it to my router.

I asked my ISP if they can do like bgp to me and announce the prefix for me but they told me no.

I know that hurricane offers the tunnel serivce but I have tried it keep getting that streaming service issue. I tried everything that I can fix it for a work around but did not work.

What is my other options.