Ipv6 vs IPv4

Propulsion

Propulsion

The buck stops here.
Would an ipv6 full node be able to operate the same as an ipv4 node or would it cause segregation on the network in terms of operating as a Masternode?

Now if you had a single node that allowed both ipv4 and ipv6 communication, you would bridge the gap between ipv6 and ipv4 nodes. Lets call them "SuperMasternodes".

Once a supernode receives a block, it would send it to the connected ipv6 nodes thus completing the network.

Problem is, if an ipv6 node is selected, only the pools configured to allow ipv6 support would be able to pay the ipv6 nodes. Payments go by address.

Is it possible to have a fully functional solo ipv6 node?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm... good question, and not one I am likely to answer, but for questions such as this, I suspect an experiment could offer a more definitive answer than any amount of theory. Surely testnet could be enlisted for an experimental setup. Just a thought...
 
flare said:
If the dnsseeder setup is to complex for testing the setup, you can simply add a static AAAA record for a node in a DNS zone and add this as dnsseed to the net.cpp file - this should reduce the complexity for testing ipv6.
Click to expand...
well coingun is running a seeder which is supposed to do ipv6 too.

anyways, i can officially confirm ipv6 is working just fine!
Code: 
2014-09-23 22:26:27 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.10.13.15/: version 70038, blocks=127472, us=[2a01:4f8:110:522d::2]:9999, them=[2001:41d0:a:1249::1]:9999, peer=12

i know 3 nodes, if you need an ipv6 peer, add them:

addnode=[2001:19f0:ac00:1c1::64] #coingun
addnode=[2001:41d0:a:1249::1] #naxin7
addnode=[2a01:4f8:110:522d::2] #vertoe
 
addnode=[2001:19f0:ac00:1c1::64]
addnode=[2001:41d0:a:1249::1]
addnode=[2a01:4f8:110:522d::2]

I have made AAAA records for these:

addnode=1.dnsseed.masternode.io
addnode=2.dnsseed.masternode.io
addnode=3.dnsseed.masternode.io

Should also work.

Edit: These are just simple AAAA records for those ip's for ease of use the only one that is actually running dnsseed is dnsseed.masternode.io which is also 1.dnsseed.masternode.io
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For shit's and giggle's I have started a second dnsseed on this machine. This one has an AAAA record pointing 1.dnsseed.masternode.io to it's ipv6 address and has the NS record for ipv6.dnsseed.masternode.io. Still can't figure out the query from dig though.

evan82:~/>dnsseed -h ipv6.dnsseed.masternode.io -n 1.dnsseed.masternode.io
Starting 4 DNS threads for ipv6.dnsseed.masternode.io on 1.dnsseed.masternode.io (port 53).......done
Starting seeder...done
Starting 96 crawler threads...done
[14-09-23 23:02:07] 368/7805 available (4534 tried in 451s, 3236 new, 35 active), 0 banned; 0 DNS requests, 4 db queries
 
coingun said:
For shit's and giggle's I have started a second dnsseed on this machine. This one has an AAAA record pointing 1.dnsseed.masternode.io to it's ipv6 address and has the NS record for ipv6.dnsseed.masternode.io. Still can't figure out the query from dig though.

evan82:~/>dnsseed -h ipv6.dnsseed.masternode.io -n 1.dnsseed.masternode.io
Starting 4 DNS threads for ipv6.dnsseed.masternode.io on 1.dnsseed.masternode.io (port 53).......done
Starting seeder...done
Starting 96 crawler threads...done
[14-09-23 23:02:07] 368/7805 available (4534 tried in 451s, 3236 new, 35 active), 0 banned; 0 DNS requests, 4 db queries
Click to expand...
Does you firewall allow 53/UDP for ipv6 traffic? Getting timeouts for my DNS queries...

At least 80/TCP works ^^

upload_2014-9-24_1-27-3.png
 
Firewall.... LOL? Nah for testing I have iptables empty shouldn't be anything blocking it. It show's its listening for udp port 53 traffic.

udp 0 0 0.0.0.0:53 0.0.0.0:*
 
flare said:
Could you check iptables6 too?
Click to expand...
root@ladar:~# iptables -4 -L
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination

Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
-----
root@ladar:~# ip6tables -L
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination

Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
-----
root@ladar:~# netstat -tulpn | grep :53
udp 0 0 0.0.0.0:53 0.0.0.0:* 2645/dnsseed
 
Seems the dnsseeder is not answering on ipv6 queries, i am just getting timeouts, whereas google ipv6 DNS works.

Code: 
C:\dig-win32>dig -6 AAAA +short six.heise.de @[2001:4860:4860::8888]
2a02:2e0:3fe:1001:302::

C:\dig-win32>dig -6 AAAA +short six.heise.de @[2001:19f0:ac00:1c1::64]
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached

C:\dig-win32>
 
Propulsion said:
You know it really sucks when your ISP doesn't support IPv6. I'll still try to dual stack some MN's though.
Click to expand...

Wait what? Dual stacking? That sounds like something I want to learn how to do and annoy the hell out of everybody by asking annoying questions and constantly needing help! Sign me up!
 
flare said:
I am using a IPv6 tunnel broker with my ISP, works quite nice for me --> https://www.sixxs.net
Click to expand...

I'll look into it. I just set up a new server to consolidate a bunch of daemons on to it instead of using micro's. Unfortunately they only allowed me to assign one other ipv4 address. So even if I did set up multiple nodes only through IPv6 I wouldn't be able to start a masternode from the local.

This might work for me.

Edit: Excuse my ignorance but is this safe to pass the MN start command through?

^^ Read how it works.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top