Category Archives: IPv6

Well, this is simply IPv6 stuff. Either network and/or security related.

Basic MP-BGP Lab: Cisco Router, Palo Alto, Fortinet

Authentication, Cisco Systems, Fortinet, IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, Routing, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

While playing around in my lab learning BGP I configured iBGP with Multiprotocol Extensions (exchanging routing information for IPv6 and legacy IP) between two Cisco routers, a Palo Alto Networks firewall, and a Fortinet FortiGate firewall. Following are all configuration steps from their GUI (Palo) as well as their CLIs (Cisco, Fortinet). It’s just a “basic” lab because I did not configure any possible parameter such as local preference or MED but left almost all to its defaults, except neighboring from loopbacks, password authentication and next-hop-self.

Continue reading Basic MP-BGP Lab: Cisco Router, Palo Alto, Fortinet →

2001:db8::/32 in the Wild

Internet Access, IPv6, , , ,

If you have ever read some docs or RFCs about IPv6 you should be quite familiar with the 2001:db8::/32 “IPv6 Address Prefix Reserved for Documentation”, RFC 3849. This RFC clearly states how you should handle addresses within this range: “This assignment implies that IPv6 network operators should add this address prefix to the list of non-routeable IPv6 address space, and if packet filters are deployed, then this address prefix should be added to packet filters.”

I was interested whether those addresses are actually used in the Internet. For this purpose I analyzed my firewall logs for 6 months to get an idea. Though it was not that much, I actually got a couple of connections inbound and outbound (!) sourced or destined to those reserved IPv6 addresses.

Continue reading 2001:db8::/32 in the Wild →

IPv6 Interface ID Structure

IPv6, Memorandum, , ,

While there are many approaches on how to structure your IPv6 prefix into /64 subnets (blogposts, books, talks) there are only a few hints what you can do with the other 64 bits of the addresses, namely the IPv6 interface identifier or IID. To my mind you can put some (but not too much) logic into those IIDs to a) have some structure for your addresses that b) helps you identifying those addresses when seeing them in logs or anywhere else. Hence it is easier for you to remember the IPv6 address behind a name (forward DNS) as well as the host when seeing the address (reverse DNS).

This post just shows the approach I am using in my lab. You might find it useful or you might disagree completely. Anyhow, feel free to comment your experiences or solutions for that. :D I am wondering why there isn’t much discussion about these IIDs at all. Maybe for some good reasons I am not seeing yet?

Continue reading IPv6 Interface ID Structure →

IPv6 Renumbering: A Pain in the …

IPv6, , , , , , , , , ,

If you’re following my blog you probably know that I am using IPv6 everywhere. Everything in my lab is dual-stacked if not already IPv6-only. Great so far.

A few months ago my lab moved to another ISP which required to change all IP addresses (since I don’t have PI space yet). Oh boy! While it was almost no problem to change the legacy IPv4 addresses (only a few NATs), it was a huge pain in the … to change the complete infrastructure with its global unicast IPv6 addresses. It turned out that changing the interface IPv6 addresses was merely the first step, while many modifications at different services were the actual problem. And this was *only* my lab and not a complex company or the like.

Following you find a list of changes I made for IPv6 and for legacy IP. Just an overview to get an idea of differences and stumbling blocks.

Continue reading IPv6 Renumbering: A Pain in the … →

IPv6 Upper Layer Protocol Samples

IPv6, Memorandum, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Some time ago I published a pcap that can be used to study basic IPv6 protocol messages such as ICMPv6 for Router Advertisements, Neighbor Solicitations, etc.: “Basic IPv6 Messages: Wireshark Capture“. You can use it to learn the basic IPv6 address assignment and layer 2 address resolution. However, that pcap does not include any upper layer protocols.

This time I captured a few application layer protocols that I used over IPv6 rather than over legacy IP. Common user protocols such as DNS, HTTP/S, IMAP, SMTP (with STARTTLS), as well as some network administration protocols: SSH, SNMP, and Ping. It is not that interesting at all ;) though you can use it to have some examples for Wireshark to prove that those application protocols are almost the same when run above IPv6 compared to IPv4.

Continue reading IPv6 Upper Layer Protocol Samples →

TROOPERS18: Dynamic IPv6 Prefix Problems and VPNs

Conference Talks, Internet Access, IPv6, , , , , , , ,

Just a few days ago I gave a talk at Troopers 18 in Heidelberg, Germany, about the problems of dynamic (non-persistent) IPv6 prefixes, as well as IPv6 VPNs in general. Following are my slides and the video of the talk:

Continue reading TROOPERS18: Dynamic IPv6 Prefix Problems and VPNs →

IKEv2 IPsec VPN Tunnel Palo Alto <-> FortiGate

Fortinet, IPsec/VPN, IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, , , , , ,

And one more IPsec VPN post, again between the Palo Alto Networks firewall and a Fortinet FortiGate, again over IPv6 but this time with IKEv2. It was no problem at all to change from IKEv1 to IKEv2 for this already configured VPN connection between the two different firewall vendors. Hence I am only showing the differences within the configuration and some listings from common CLI outputs for both firewalls.

Continue reading IKEv2 IPsec VPN Tunnel Palo Alto <-> FortiGate →

IPv6 IPsec VPN Tunnel Palo Alto <-> FortiGate

Fortinet, IPsec/VPN, IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, , , , ,

Towards the global IPv6-only strategy ;) VPN tunnels will be used over IPv6, too. I configured a static IPsec site-to-site VPN between a Palo Alto Networks and a Fortinet FortiGate firewall via IPv6 only. I am using it for tunneling both Internet Protocols: IPv6 and legacy IP.

While it was quite easy to bring the tunnel “up”, I had some problems tunneling both Internet Protocols over the single phase 2 session. The reason was some kind of differences within the IPsec tunnel handling between those two firewall vendors. Here are the details along with more than 20 screenshots and some CLI listings.

Continue reading IPv6 IPsec VPN Tunnel Palo Alto <-> FortiGate →

Palo Alto NDP Monitoring

IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, , , , ,

With PAN-OS version 8.0 Palo Alto Networks introduced another IPv6 feature, namely “NDP Monitoring for Fast Device Location“. It basically adds a few information to the existing neighbor cache such as the User-ID (if present) and a “last reported” timestamp. That is: the admin has a new reporting window within the Palo Alto GUI that shows the reported IPv6 addresses along with its MAC addresses. This is really helpful for two reasons: 1) a single IPv6 node can have multiple IPv6 addresses which makes it much more difficult to track them back to the MAC address and 2) if SLAAC is used you now have a central point where you can look up the MAC-IPv6 bindings (comparable to the DHCP server lease for legacy IPv4).

Continue reading Palo Alto NDP Monitoring →

PAN NGFW IPv6 NDP RA RDNSS & DNSSL

DNS/DNSSEC, IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, , , , , , , , , ,

Haha, do you like acronyms as much as I do? This article is about the feature from Palo Alto Networks’ Next-Generation Firewall for Internet Protocol version 6 Neighbor Discovery Protocol Router Advertisements with Recursive Domain Name System Server and Domain Name System Search List options. ;) I am showing how to use it and how Windows and Linux react on it.

Continue reading PAN NGFW IPv6 NDP RA RDNSS & DNSSL →

Juniper ScreenOS IPv4 vs. IPv6 Throughput Tests

Bandwidth/Delay, IPv6, Juniper Networks, , , , , , , ,

And finally the throughput comparison of IPv6 and legacy IP on a Juniper ScreenOS firewall. Nobody needs this anymore since they are all gone. ;) But since I did the same speedtests for Palo Alto and FortiGates I was interested in the results here as well.

Continue reading Juniper ScreenOS IPv4 vs. IPv6 Throughput Tests →

Palo Alto IPv4 vs. IPv6 Performance Speedtests

Bandwidth/Delay, IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, , , , , , ,

After I have done some speedtests on the FortiGate firewall I was interested in doing the same tests on a Palo Alto. That is: What are the throughput differences of IPv4 vs. IPv6, measured with and without security profiles, i.e., with and without threat prevention.

It turned out that the throughput is much higher than the official information from Palo Alto. Furthermore, I was not able to test the threat prevention at all, because non of my traffic (Iperf and mere HTTP) went through the antivirus engines. I have to test this again. However, here are the measured values so far:

Continue reading Palo Alto IPv4 vs. IPv6 Performance Speedtests →

IPv6 through IPv4 VPN Tunnel with Palo Alto

IPsec/VPN, IPv6, Palo Alto Networks, Routing, , , ,

The most common transition method for IPv6 (that is: how to enable IPv6 on a network that does not have a native IPv6 connection to the Internet) is a “6in4” tunnel. Other tunneling methods such as Teredo or SixXS are found on different literatures as well. However, another method that is not often explained is to tunnel the IPv6 packets through a normal VPN connection. For example, if the main office has a native IPv6 connection to the Internet as well as VPN connections to its remote offices, it is easy to bring IPv6 subnets to these stations. Here comes an example with two Palo Alto firewalls.

Continue reading IPv6 through IPv4 VPN Tunnel with Palo Alto →

FortiGate IPv4 vs. IPv6 Performance Speedtests

Bandwidth/Delay, Fortinet, IPv6, , , , , , ,

I was interested in the performance of my FortiGate firewall when comparing IPv4 and IPv6 traffic. Therefore I built a small lab consisting a FortiWiFi 90D firewall and two Linux clients running Iperf. I tested the network throughput for both Internet Protocols in both directions within three scenarios: 1) both clients plugged into the same “hardware switch” on the FortiGate, 2) different subnets with an “allow any any” policy without any further security profiles, and finally, 3) activating antivirus, application control, IPS, and SSL inspection.

Continue reading FortiGate IPv4 vs. IPv6 Performance Speedtests →

Basic IPv6 Configuration on a FortiGate Firewall

Fortinet, IPv6, Memorandum, Template, , , , , , ,

It’s really great that the FortiGate firewalls have a DHCPv6 server implemented. With this mandatory service, IPv6-only networks can be deployed directly behind a FortiGate because the stateless DHCPv6 server provides the DNS server addresses. (This is unlike Palo Alto or Cisco which have no DHCPv6 server implemented.)

UPDATE: In the meantime Fortinet has implemented the RDNSS and DNSSL options as well. Great. Hence you don’t need DHCPv6 at all anymore to run an IPv6-only network. I updated my listings below as well.

However, the configuration on the FortiGate is really bad because nothing of the IPv6 features can be set via the GUI. (And this is called a Next-Generation Firewall? Not only the features count, but also the usability!) Everything must be done through the CLI which is sometimes hard to remember. Therefore I am publishing this memo of the appropriate CLI configuration commands.

Continue reading Basic IPv6 Configuration on a FortiGate Firewall →