Hello,

I'm requesting the inclusion of SLAAC into RouterOS.

In my case, I use in a few locations Verizon Wireless UML295 USB LTE devices. These do not support DHCPv6, and as such there's no way to get a global IPv6 address from them. (see this thread http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=95505. Furthermore, the IPv6 addresses are dynamically assigned, so it's not possible just to add one.

Whilst I understand SLAAC should not be implemented for pure routers (they should have static IP addresses), it makes these type of setup with the RouterOS device acting as CPE not feasible.

thanks.

Support that request!
My ISP provide ipv6 only over SLAAC. We want to work with Mikrotik hardware, but not with a Zyxelware

Support that request!
My ISP provide ipv6 only over SLAAC.

How is that working? Do you get only a single address from your provider? or only a single /64 prefix?
Normally a router will need more than a single /64 prefix to operate, and SLAAC is not going to help very much.

RouterOS supports getting address using SLAAC. You just have to choose if you want to get address this way or if you want your router to do some routing. One or the other, not both.

I wonder how ISPs expect their users to connect routers to a SLAAC-only network.
"proxy-nd" perhaps? (is there such a spec?)
Perhaps they're expecting the customers' routers to do NAT66. (which is against many people's religion)


dhcp-pd seems so cut-and-dry - I wonder why ISPs wouldn't use this....

I wonder how ISPs expect their users to connect routers to a SLAAC-only network.
"proxy-nd" perhaps? (is there such a spec?)

That is what I wonder as well... that is why I asked if get gets only a single address or maybe a single prefix.
The standard router would either do NAT or it would be more like a bridge, for a single user network.

I get a /48 from my ISP. That can be considered overkill, a /56 or /60 should be enough for a consumer
connection. But indeed, they just use DHCP-PD. I would welcome a feature in the router to get a predictable
subnet on an interface, but otherwise it works fine. No idea why a provider would not use it.

I would welcome a feature in the router to get a predictable
subnet on an interface, but otherwise it works fine.

I've requested this feature too (albeit the forums are not the right place to do so).

Cisco lets you configure an interface as:
PREFIX-POOL::0003:0000:0000:0000:1/64
If the prefix is /60 then the first three zeros of the 0003 group get overwritten by the actual values from the prefix... So you've explicitly chosen a specific /64 from a bigger prefix block.

Cisco lets you configure an interface as:
PREFIX-POOL::0003:0000:0000:0000:1/64
If the prefix is /60 then the first three zeros of the 0003 group get overwritten by the actual values from the prefix... So you've explicitly chosen a specific /64 from a bigger prefix block.

Yes that is what I would like to see. When I got the MikroTik I had to renumber my network because it does not
assign a public address to the PPPoE as my previous router did (and it picked prefix:0 for that) and so my internal
network, which was prefix:1 now became prefix:0. I would have preferred to keep it the same.
And also, it looks like the prefixes are now assigned in sequence of network name or internal ID. It could mean that
when I decide to add IPv6 on another interface, things again change. Not nice.
At work the ISP does not use DHCP-PD but requires static addresses to be manually defined on all interfaces, and
I could use convenient network numbers that are future-proof.