Why not support IPV6

my company product begin to support IPV6,I need the IPV6 environment.if nethserver support IPV6,I think that is amazing

There are no immediate plans for IPv6, indeed it’s already supported in CentOS and even Shorewall.
We don’t have any IPv6 connections to test it, so, for the moment, we lack of technical and human resources.

Anyone interested to experiment a bit? :smile:

It is 2016 now. Comcast generally has IPv6 enabled on their network, and I’m sure several other ISPs do now as well. There should be a reasonable expectation for IPv6 usability at home. That should allow for a good segment of the public to test this functionality. I would hope some or all of the Devs would have access as well. The barrier to IPv6 accessibility has diminished greatly. There really isn’t an excuse for not developing this feature other then it isn’t deemed a priority. Though that shouldn’t be the case either, We have depleted IPv4, and every day the need grows for IPv6 adoption.


In general, I would be willing to help with the development but I have a couple limitations. I currently have limited internet access and will not be truly available for the next couple months. Additionally, I’m not a coder, but I would be willing to run test configurations when I am able to bring up a network environment.

Granted, I am speaking from a USA perspective. As an open source project I would think that development would take place from many points on the globe and as such I would hope that some of the development staff was in the USA.

Ehi Walter,
first of all welcome aboard and thanks for breaking into the discussion, and yes we do want that development would take place from many points on the globe, we don’t have currently devs from USA but many active users like @Adam @fasttech @painkiller895 @macwunder @TomTerrific @dlbgp @giacom @MyDarkFire @joncolby @Sean_Maloney
I hope they can provide their voice about this topic

I would be willing to run test configurations when I am able to bring up a network environment.

Thanks for your willingness, would you like to lend a hand with the alpha2 too? Release is very close

I am willing to help. I would need to see the details as to what kinds of participation are available. If you could send me a link or drop me an E-mail I can see what I can do. As mentioned before, I currently do not have a substantial home setup at the moment. I am in the middle of a move and it will be a few months before I can settle in.

Additionally, What is the priority for developing a full IPv6 feature set? Is it anywhere on the road map?

Here you can find many things to go on:

Actually it’s not scheduled.
But CentOS already supports it and even shorewall does.

I’d start with something like this:

1 Like

Due to the release of documentation regarding IPv6 in both CentOS and Shorewall, would there not be a way to create an alpha quality experimental configuration interface for IPv6 setup. Additionally, what about features like IPv6 DHCP?

Knowing that it isn’t scheduled, what road blocks beyond currently not having access to an IPv6 environment are there?

If I were able to supply access to a IPv6 environment via a vpn would that help get the process started?

What ??!!??

Don’t you believe? You should have faith mate! :slight_smile:
It’s a matter of time

Well yeah, but I didn’t think it was just a few hours! :wink:

It’s a matter of priority.
Everybody wants Samba 4, or an improved web interface, but only really really few people are asking for IPv6.

Maybe @alefattorini or @filippo_carletti have a different view on this?

Yes it is and for this reason I asked some U.S. guys if they have a different opinion on that

Well let me share the request for ip6 too. I think it is like sticking your head in the sand to not implement ipv6 (or not prioritize it) in several parts of thecworld new ip4 addresses aren’t available anymore. It is a matter of (little?) time until ip6 is mandatory.

For ISP it is a mandatory…but for a local network (behind a server) does it is really a mandatory…we can have alot of devices with a class A :smile:

I can be wrong…please shout your argument.

1 Like

Well I do want Samba 4 as well and I understand the approach. However, I definitely feel that some thought and traction should be given to IPv6.

I appreciate your consideration. IPv6 is coming. I would like to see Nethserver a little ahead of the curve rather than a little behind. While I wouldn’t ask for you to put it as number 1 priority, I do think it needs to be on the map. As was previously mentioned, CentOS and ShoreWall are already compliant. Though I am not a developer, my perspective is that we would really just need an interface that controls the IPv6 options within the OS and ShoreWall.

Do we really want to wait till it becomes mandatory and then rush to get it into place?

1 Like

As a U.S. user that’s not using NS for gateway/utm duties yet my need for ipv6 is a ways out. My primary isp is dual stacking and will start pushing ipv6 towards business accts here this year, they claim, though my existing installs can run ipv4 for now, but then again my default utm solution already supports ipv6.

My primary network within which I run testing needs consistent connectivity so I can’t just swap gateways around. My secondary test network currently lacks the modem hardware to support ipv6, plus it’s an hour on the phone everytime I need to provision hardware with them, so I’m pretty much useless for ipv6 dev regardless of my desire to jump into it.

Maybe your red interface might need it?

why not robb, but a nethserver needs an ethernet modem before, so the modem needs to be ipv6 compatible, but not necessary the neth.

For now i can read guys who are simply asking something without explanations. For me ipv6 is a geek’s hobby, except for the Internet service providers of course.

I think that @filippo_carletti may agree on this, not currently a priority but we can put it on the map.