Hurricane Electric's IPv6 Tunnel Broker Forums

Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to Hurricane Electric's Tunnelbroker.net forums!

Author Topic: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL  (Read 3795 times)

lucabert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« on: July 17, 2012, 12:29:49 PM »

Hi, folks!

In the future I'll install a server (or maybe even a cluster) to manage the two DSLs in the office. They are normal DSL from Deutsche Telekom (each with a different IP, unfortunately dynamic assigned).
I'll configure them for a load-balanced outgoing line. In lartc.org is explained how I can do it. No problem here!

Well, I'd like to configure an IPv6-Tunnel, too, but I want that it runs on both DSLs at the same time.
How can I do that? If I configure two Tunnel, then I have two networks, and I want to have just one network in the office...

Any idea?

Thanks a lot!
Luca Bertoncello
Logged

broquea

  • Sr. Network Engineer, HE.NET AS6939
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1678
    • View Profile
    • Another IPv6 Blog...
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2012, 12:57:15 PM »

If you want something dynamic, then you'd look for a BGP based tunnel. You can only get one of those if you have your own ASN and IPv6 allocation. You'd then configure 2 BGP tunnels and announce over both and sort out the load balancing on your side. Other option is with 2 unique tunnels, a bunch of source address routing policies configured on the router with the 2 tunnels terminating on it.
Logged

lucabert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2012, 01:02:21 PM »

If you want something dynamic, then you'd look for a BGP based tunnel. You can only get one of those if you have your own ASN and IPv6 allocation. You'd then configure 2 BGP tunnels and announce over both and sort out the load balancing on your side. Other option is with 2 unique tunnels, a bunch of source address routing policies configured on the router with the 2 tunnels terminating on it.

Hi, thanks for your answer...
For the BGP based tunnel: how can I get an own ASN? How many cost it?

Otherwise, could you explain me the second option, with two unique tunnels? What I need is that some devices are reachable from Internet with their own IPv6-Address. Is it possible (without a BGP tunnel)?

Thanks
Luca Bertoncello
Logged

cholzhauer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2591
    • View Profile
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2012, 01:04:09 PM »

As for two unique tunnels...you just need to create two tunnels that terminate at separate IP addresses in your network  (EG 1.2.3.4 and 2.3.4.5)  You then use some routing magic on your internal network to make the two tunnels invisible to your users (That way they just see it as one)
Logged

broquea

  • Sr. Network Engineer, HE.NET AS6939
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1678
    • View Profile
    • Another IPv6 Blog...
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2012, 01:07:50 PM »

Hi, thanks for your answer...
For the BGP based tunnel: how can I get an own ASN? How many cost it?

Go to your local RIR (Arin, Ripe, Apnic, etc) and see what they charge.
Logged

lucabert

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2012, 10:30:52 PM »

As for two unique tunnels...you just need to create two tunnels that terminate at separate IP addresses in your network  (EG 1.2.3.4 and 2.3.4.5)  You then use some routing magic on your internal network to make the two tunnels invisible to your users (That way they just see it as one)

This is the problem... This "routing magic on my internal network"...
Could you suggest me some abracadabra? :)

Another idea: I must install a server (by provider, with static IPs), too. Can I use it as "gateway" for these DSLs? My idea: on this server runs a tunnel (or maybe I use native IPv6), then it sends the received pakets to the right device using the two DSLs in load-balancing.
Is it possible? How?

Thanks a lot
Luca Bertoncello
Logged

docbill

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2012, 08:38:47 AM »

The abracadabra stuff is the point of the question...

So I have two separate tunnels on two separate routers, using two separate ISP's.   One is cable, the other is DSL.   If I enable RADVD broadcast for both routers, then I find my hosts pickup two addresses.   I can actually do things like 'ping ipv6.google.com', or 'traceroute ipv6.google.com' and it seems to work.  However, if I open up 'ipv6.google.com' in a webbrowser, I consistently get a timeout error.   If instead I turn off RADVD in one, and only one of the routers then everything works...

The problem is of course, I want to use this configuration so I have no single point of failure.   As soon as I turn off RADVD I have a single point of failure...

So the question is what sort of magic can I use to resolve this?



Logged

broquea

  • Sr. Network Engineer, HE.NET AS6939
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1678
    • View Profile
    • Another IPv6 Blog...
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2012, 09:43:02 AM »

http://www.linuxhorizon.ro/iproute2.html & http://www.lartc.org/howto/

Take what they use for IPv4 and reapply as IPv6 as best and close as possible. Keep trying until it works.
Logged

docbill

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2012, 04:56:04 AM »

http://www.linuxhorizon.ro/iproute2.html & http://www.lartc.org/howto/

Take what they use for IPv4 and reapply as IPv6 as best and close as possible. Keep trying until it works.

The IPv4 stuff is trivial.  Hosts don't end-up multicasting, so there isn't a problem.  Even when I use DHCPv6, hosts still pickup RADVD broadcasts from both routers and configure both IP addresses.

Bill
Logged

snarked

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 698
    • View Profile
Re: IPv6-Tunnel on two DSL
« Reply #9 on: October 20, 2017, 11:39:26 AM »

...  Hosts don't end-up multicasting, so there isn't a problem.... 

You're wrong about that.  From where do you think multicast packets are sourced?
Logged