Forum - Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6 :: SixXS - IPv6 Deployment & Tunnel Broker

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 05 May 2008 21:33:35

Other than the Apple Airport Extreme, does anyone know if there are any current home routers that support IPv6 out of the box? I know there is OpenWRT, but I am more interested in solutions that don't need too much in terms of technical expertise. If you know of any, please could you add it to this wiki page: Wiki : Routers

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 05 May 2008 21:03:53

I've done some research and added some obvious (Cisco, Netscreen (Juniper), Sonicwall), will continue doing research on it...

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Wednesday, 07 May 2008 14:14:59

I've updated the list specifying IOS releases for the cisco routers, clarifying support for 800 series, added configuration links for some Juniper models, and added Allied Telesis routers with link to an example of a 6to4 tunnel to a Cisco router.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Thursday, 08 May 2008 02:37:34

I am wondering whether we should split the "Home, Home Office & Small Office" section in two. The catch is that routers aimed at the home/home office are often suitable for the small office, but routers aimed at the small office aren't necessarily suited for the home/home office. For me the points that makes the difference between the two are price (usually less the $200USD for home) and whether they can be installed without the need of a system specialist. If I break the section in two, it will be: * Home/Home Office * Small Office I will go ahead and do this next week if no one had any objections.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 12 May 2008 00:38:07

I really don't know prices of Allied Telesys AR750 (it's the only one I don't know about), but all the others will have to be configured by somebody with a little network knowledge, and with prices upper than $200. In this section there are lot of Ethernet routers (sonicwall, Netscreen) that would require another xDSL router in the front of them (making it more expensive). What I really want to say is that if it's splitted in two, there will be almost no router (or no-one at all) in the lower than $200 segment that could be installed without any network knowledge, and anybody at a home office should be as secure as a small office. If it's changed, in the category Home there will be only the Apple entries. I wouldn't consider leaving them alone (they can't do 4-6 tunneling and are real routers?), as new users could think their home would need an Apple Airport Expreme because they're not real offices. (I though we were talking about routers, not just network electronics...) P.S.: I'm a newby ipv6 user, but I would not recommend anybody configure a ipv6 without technical knowledge to defend it. In some forums and papers I've seen NAT (the evil that doesn't permit us do some protocols) not as a bad thing, but as a ipv4 feature (about security and prophylactic) lost in ipv6. I believe there's not much worms inside the ipv6 networks right now (I've seen any try of illicit access since the time I enabled firewall in my subnets, imposible in an ipv4 network), we must think we're not alone and in the moment ipv6 will explode all the evils out there will be between us. P.S.2.: Sorry for the change of vision of such a simpler question, for the length of the answer, and for the turns inside the answer, english is not my mother language.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 12 May 2008 12:15:45

I think the most important distinction would be the uplink capability. A pure ethernet router is great if you happen to get your uplink directly through ethernet. And I guess you will need PPPoE support at most networks. But a ethernet router is of no use if you have to put a DSL modem in front of it. The extra NAT will cause you a lot of grief.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 12 May 2008 21:15:28

Almost all routers in the list are Ethernet routers (Sonicwall, Juniper, Allied TS), others that may apply here are Ethernet routers as well (Cisco PIX or the newer Cisco ASA). All of these are Ethernet routers because they are much more flexible than any DSL router, they can fit in any configuration you need (ADSL, SDSL, Fiber, etc.) without changing any electronic except the router your ISP company gives you for free. This makes a more long term investment without taking it to garbage because of a technology change. All these configuration with ethernet routers doesn't need any extra NAT (the ethernet router will get the public IP with PPPoE, PPPoA or RFC1843 without any problem using the free ISP router/modem). Considering uplink capability, here we have another problem. Older Cisco 1700 series will have less uplink capabilities (ADSL) and even CPU power (packets per second) than newer small Cisco 800 series (ADSL2+ with 2Mb uplink capabilities (ASDL2+ Annex M), considered Home Office or small office. (Here the price and the date they were deployed takes in consideration it's classification). Here we can guess than any router an ISP gives you for free right now (Comtrend, Huawei, Inventel, Motorola, Speedstream, Xavi, 3Com, etc.) will not be able to do IPv4-IPv6 tunnelling. For example, smallest Cisco 8xx series has 128Mb RAM in its standard configuration upgradable to 256, you can guess the free router your ISP gives you for free doesn't have this capabilities... I think incrementing the clasification will be a mess because of all the terms we have to take into consideration in a router. (maybe somebody could consider home router a 1721 with SDSL WIC card because you can get one for 80$ on ebay...).

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Tuesday, 13 May 2008 02:03:40

Another way of doing things is scraping the sections and then just adding a column entitled 'target market'. For example Cisco uses the Linksys brand generally to target the non-business sector, and the Cisco brand for the business sector. Yet another approach is to split the page into 'DSL/Cable routers' and 'non-DSL/Cable routers'. In fact now that I think about it may be preferable.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 19:29:39

Maybe creating a matrix table at the bottom of the page with devices and specifications? What do you think? F.e.: x-DSL, Ethernet, Wifi, Tunneling, hub (ports), switch (ports) manageable, VLAN, target... This can be a mess when there will be a lot of brands, it can grow eternally, but it's the most info in the least space. ------------------------- P.S.1.: The change done to the page is not correct, Airport Extreme has a Gigabit port to connect a router (like most other in the list), it's NOT a DSL router. Time capsule isn't a DSL router either. It has a Gigabit port that can be connected to the Internet though a router/modem or cable router, but it's really a NAS with Backup functionality and posibility to become a network printer server like others out there (FreeNAS, Synology, etc.) Cisco has lot of diferent routers I grouped in 87x, 1700 series and 1800 series (has greater series but no consideration here). Almost all routers can connect to a king of DSL. 876 DSL-ISDN, 877 DSL-PoTS, 878 SDSL. In the 18xx series 1801, 1802 and 1803 are the fixed configurations, 1811, 1812 are the ethernet ones and the 1841/1861 can be upgraded with the HWIC-1ADSL or HWIC-xSDSL. In the 17xx series any router adding a WIC-1ADSL can connect to the DSL-PoTS or a WIC-1SDSL-vX for a simetric. Please change this according (having this subcategory this way is a mess because 871 router is a ethernet but 877 is a DSL). This could become in a huge list of Cisco routers repeated in each of the categories... -------------------------- P.S.2.: Although Cisco bought part of Linksys, it's interest in it didn't went further than absorb some technology Cisco needed for it's voice plans. They are two different companies with almost no connection between them. The linksys are of no use in this list other than WRT firmwares (maybe we could add in the list with links to how to configure them instead of the quick reference at the beginning of the document?). What Cisco call SOHO market target for the capabilities of a router could be a big company in the eyes of a Linksys enginyeer.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 22:09:01

If the Airport Extreme is not a DSL router then what is it? Everywhere I see these boxes are generally labelled as routers. The Time Capsule shares the same base functionality as the Airport Extreme, though with added NAS functionality. Wikipedia's page on routers certainly lists devices such as the Linksys BEFSR41 as a router: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Router. The Apple Airport Extreme is not much different in this respect. On the other hand there is a page on Residential gateway (redirected from DSL routers). If you think creating a page entitled 'Residential Gateways' would be better, for this type of device, then I am open to this option. I will change the page back to the way it was, pending discussion.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Tuesday, 20 May 2008 00:01:10

The apple ones are in fact routers, but the word DSL are used to name Digital Subscriber Line routers. The ones that have a RJ-11 connector which fits directly in a phone jack and provides directly ADSL SHDSL connectivity. All Cisco firewalls (PIX and ASA), Juniper, Netscreen, and some Cisco routers are named ethernet routers because they don't provide such "modem" capabilities, they have one (fast)(Gibabit)ethernet where you can connect the DSL modem/router. Normally these ethernet routers have more intelligence than the low cost routers the ISP gives you for free. That's the reason to use it. The time capsule can be used to give you a online backup with almost no electronics at all. Residential can be almost the same as SOHO, as SOHO means Small Office Home Office. As SOHO is widely spread, that's the reason I liked the original categoriztion of SOHO and "Enterprise". In the SOHO category can coexist all Linksys WRT-54 series and all Cisco 8xx series without any problem. In any other categorization we might have to distinguish the capabilities of all the routers to acomplish that category. See U, Pau

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 19 May 2008 10:24:16

One approach that I came across recently was to configure the DSL Router as a bridge: 1. If your provider is using PPPoE/PPPoA simply use PPPoE on DD-WRT/AEBS etc to terminate the PPP connection instead of the DSL router - the router gets the public IP and the DSL Router runs as a bridge 2. If your provider uses DHCP then you may be able to configure as a RFC1483(??) bridge configuration and connect a "cable" router to the DSL bridge (Router) - this is how I work on my setup either way there is only a single Nat on the cable router and the DSL modem is providing a bridge from Ethernet to IP/PPPoA/PPPoE - even if your provider uses PPPoA this seems to work fine. Adrian

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 12 May 2008 21:27:34

I've added Cisco PIX and Cisco ASA, although they can't end tunnels.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Tuesday, 03 June 2008 23:48:08

What code level gives IPv6 support, Pau? The PIX running PIX-OS v6.x or earlier doesn't support IPv6.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Wednesday, 11 June 2008 20:46:37

Wiki : Routers

I've added a link to the Wikipedia IPv6 page.

Cable/DSL Routers supporting IPv6

Shadow Hawkins on Monday, 07 July 2008 09:21:46

I've taken the info about PIX from here: What's New in Cisco PIX Firewall 7.0 Please note PIX 7.0 is not available for PIX 501 or 506. Please note too PIX is EoL at this moment, surplussed by ASAs. Cisco is offering a great replace (discount) from any firewall platform (PIX or appliance from other company different from Cisco) if you buy a new ASA. See U, Pau

Please note Posting is only allowed when you are logged in.