This is incorrect.
Windows 7 respects the RFC for use of a DUID (actually all
implementations of DHCPv6 by MS currently respect the RFC's, shocking
There are three supported DUID types currently supported:
The first 16 bits of the DUID indicate the type (1, 2, or 3). e.g. a
TTL DUID will begin with 0001, and a LL DUID with 0003.
DUID-TTL and DUID-LL are the most common as they're based on a
physical address. These two types use the next 16 bits to identify
the hardware type (for Ethernet it will be 0001).
Linux DHCPv6 clients typically use DUID-LL by default. So the format
is "00030001" + MAC address. DUID-TTL is the same thing except adds a
32-bit timestamp before the LL address when generated to ensure
I should also note that the DUID is generated and stored once per
device, even if they physical interfaces are changed it will continue
to use the same DUID.
I should also note that the DUID is generated using "any" available
interface on the device; there is no requirement that the system use
the active interface to generate the DUID (though this is the typical
You can take a look at RFC 3315 for the details. Just know that a
DUID made up of only the MAC address (without following one of the
three formats mentioned above) is invalid and you shouldn't allow the
user to add such a DUID.
This is a pretty fundamental shift from what people are used to for
DHCP so it's important that people understand the difference.
I would advise against using dhcp6c and dhcp6s from the Kame project
if possible as ISC's implementation is becoming the standard for those
of us actually running IPv6.
As far as delivering IPv6 to residential users, DHCPv6-PD is certainly
becoming the way a lot of ISPs want to go. Functional CPE that works
"out of the box" is what's missing.
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Andrew White <andywhite at gmail dot com> wrote:
> My last comment on this outside of the forums because it's important these
> questions are asked on the forums as others will learn from the thread ,
> it's searchable (including google) and others can contribute.
> You may not need to do anything at all.
> m0n0wall supports ipv6 via a number of mechanisms including ppp/pppoe.
> DHCP-PD is an aide to help configure your LAN side addressing, but more than
> likely they will announce your subnet down your ppp tunnel, or give you
> m0n0wall will suggest an ip address based on receiving this announcement if
> you enable RA on the WAN, and wait to receive an announcement.
> DHCP-PD should only be required if you are given a different home subnet on
> a regular basis, and reconfiguring your WAN would be a pain, but that really
> would not be normal in an ipv6 environment where you get a subnet associated
> with your UID.
> DUID's are supposed to be static according to the RFC's and most OS's use
> the MAC address to form their DUID, but Windows 7 , for example, doesn't.
> is why you must enter a DUID in dhcp6d for windows 7 systems, and just a MAC
> for others).
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Egbert Jan <egbert at vandenbussche dot nl> wrote:
>> Hi Andy.
>> Well.. the request is to put into the image what is neccessary to get
>> Ipv6 going. I'm currently in a pilot for native IPv6 with prefix delegation
>> on unnumbered link organized by XS4ALL a major player here in NL.
>> Integration is needed for wide-dhcp6-client and radvd might need pacthing.
>> The DHCP6 client needs a configuration file. Parameters should be set via
>> the GUI. Logging what goes on is essential as is a status display. ppp
>> need extensions to send/receive IPV6CP. Also a unique but no-changing DUID
>> must be created (or kept) in the confuguration. I would advise a type 3
>> I saw that it should be possible to use exec.php to add dhcp6c and config.
>> did not go thru that all, though... I took another piece of (x86) hardware
>> and installed OpenWRT 10.03. Got that working today. Still, when monowall
>> becomes available, I will stay on that platform. OpenWRT is quite new to
>> It has a nice look and feel and there is a full commandline (ash in
>> busybox). I must say that it rocks.
>> I do not know how rigid the 8 Mb image size barrier is that you developers
>> seem to have set for yourselves. With the newer hardware it is hardly an
>> issue anymore imho. OpenWRT formats whatever extra space you have and uses
>> unionfs to overlap. So I have plenty of room on my 256 Mb IDE-Flashcard.
>> Egbert Jan
>> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> > Van: Andrew White [mailto:andywhite at gmail dot com]
>> > Verzonden: woensdag 28 april 2010 17:31
>> > Aan: Egbert Jan
>> > CC: m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>> > Onderwerp: Re: [m0n0wall-dev] native IPV6 needs dhcp6c
>> > time to look at this in the next 2-3 weeks, work permitting.
>> > Also, if you tried using dhcp6c , posting your results in there too ?
>> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Egbert Jan
>> > <egbert at vandenbussche dot nl> wrote:
>> > > It would be wonderful when dhcp6c could be in the 1.33 (or
>> > a later...)
>> > > release! With a posibility to configure via the
>> > webinterface offcause!
>> > > There is some activity already; there is an image that can
>> > be uploaded
>> > > via the exec.php page. This is cumbersome though...
>> > >
>> > > Any chance that dhcp6c is finding its way into Monowall???
>> > >
>> > > Egbert Jan
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash dev dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash dev dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>> > >
>> > >
Epic Communications Specialist
Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526
Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System