[GH-ISSUE #46] Feature Request: internal IPv6 support #126

Closed
opened 2026-08-05 00:37:20 -04:00 by saavagebueno · 29 comments
Owner

Originally created by @unixfox on GitHub (Jul 5, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/issues/46

Originally assigned to: @nazarewk on GitHub.

Hello,

In the README I only see IPv4 subnets, is wiretrustee working with IPv6 subnets? If not, is it possible to add a support for IPv6?

Originally created by @unixfox on GitHub (Jul 5, 2021). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/issues/46 Originally assigned to: @nazarewk on GitHub. Hello, In the README I only see IPv4 subnets, is wiretrustee working with IPv6 subnets? If not, is it possible to add a support for IPv6?
saavagebueno added the enhancementfeature-requestipv6 labels 2026-08-05 00:37:20 -04:00
Author
Owner

@braginini commented on GitHub (Jul 8, 2021):

hey @unixfox .
Thanks for creating the issue.
Yes, we will add ipv6 support, however, we don't have a strict deadline for that yet.
I will let you know once we have some clarity around this topic.

<!-- gh-comment-id:876645520 --> @braginini commented on GitHub (Jul 8, 2021): hey @unixfox . Thanks for creating the issue. Yes, we will add ipv6 support, however, we don't have a strict deadline for that yet. I will let you know once we have some clarity around this topic.
Author
Owner

@misuzu commented on GitHub (Aug 15, 2022):

IPv6 would be awesome. It would also be great if something like 6plane addressing scheme in zerotier could be integrated.

<!-- gh-comment-id:1214678752 --> @misuzu commented on GitHub (Aug 15, 2022): IPv6 would be awesome. It would also be great if something like [6plane addressing scheme in zerotier](https://zerotier.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/SD/pages/7274520/Using+NDP+Emulated+6PLANE+Addressing+With+Docker) could be integrated.
Author
Owner

@nazarewk commented on GitHub (Jan 18, 2023):

I'm believe there needs to be some update on IPv6 in addition to #577 , on clients I am getting errors like those complaining about being unable to route IPv6 route through IPv4 addressable Peer:

Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2406:da1e:10:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2a05:d016:4f1:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2406:da1e:10:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2a05:d016:4f1:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2406:da1e:85a:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2406:da1e:85a:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2406:da1e:6d1:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2a05:d016:254:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2406:da1e:6d1:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276"
Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2a05:d016:254:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276"
<!-- gh-comment-id:1386892281 --> @nazarewk commented on GitHub (Jan 18, 2023): I'm believe there needs to be some update on IPv6 in addition to #577 , on clients I am getting errors like those complaining about being unable to route IPv6 route through IPv4 addressable Peer: ``` Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2406:da1e:10:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2a05:d016:4f1:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2406:da1e:10:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2a05:d016:4f1:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2406:da1e:85a:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2406:da1e:85a:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2406:da1e:6d1:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="getting routes returned an error: no route found for 2a05:d016:254:6d1::" file="systemops.go:50" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2406:da1e:6d1:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276" Jan 18 11:53:26 nazarewk-krul netbird[6053]: time="2023-01-18T11:53:26+01:00" level=error msg="route 2a05:d016:254:6d1::/56 couldn't be added for peer 100.77.44.6, err: invalid CIDR address: 100.77.44.6/128" file="client.go:276" ```
Author
Owner

@gdressel commented on GitHub (Jan 4, 2024):

+1

<!-- gh-comment-id:1877680395 --> @gdressel commented on GitHub (Jan 4, 2024): +1
Author
Owner

@felixls commented on GitHub (Feb 3, 2024):

+1

<!-- gh-comment-id:1925238795 --> @felixls commented on GitHub (Feb 3, 2024): +1
Author
Owner

@FlintyLemming commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2024):

True, I can not establish connection directly via IPv6 at all.

<!-- gh-comment-id:1925622713 --> @FlintyLemming commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2024): True, I can not establish connection directly via IPv6 at all.
Author
Owner

@masx200 commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2024):

any update?

<!-- gh-comment-id:1981015407 --> @masx200 commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2024): any update?
Author
Owner

@gmoxi commented on GitHub (Apr 10, 2024):

@braginini Thanks for your work. I am curious, please, why has Netbird had an open issue since 2021?

<!-- gh-comment-id:2046524888 --> @gmoxi commented on GitHub (Apr 10, 2024): @braginini Thanks for your work. I am curious, please, why has Netbird had an open issue since 2021?
Author
Owner

@agafonovim commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2024):

+1

<!-- gh-comment-id:2068298886 --> @agafonovim commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2024): +1
Author
Owner

@Gunni commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2024):

I would like this as well, i would prefer only using IPv6 on the overlay network.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2437915390 --> @Gunni commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2024): I would like this as well, i would prefer only using IPv6 on the overlay network.
Author
Owner

@Mr-Pi commented on GitHub (Feb 7, 2025):

+1

<!-- gh-comment-id:2643686877 --> @Mr-Pi commented on GitHub (Feb 7, 2025): +1
Author
Owner

@laserguy2020 commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2025):

Same, most of my DC and networks are already IPv6. So it would be nice if Netbird could do this too.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2652404410 --> @laserguy2020 commented on GitHub (Feb 11, 2025): Same, most of my DC and networks are already IPv6. So it would be nice if Netbird could do this too.
Author
Owner

@fruworg commented on GitHub (Feb 18, 2025):

+1

<!-- gh-comment-id:2665341698 --> @fruworg commented on GitHub (Feb 18, 2025): +1
Author
Owner

@davidchi2020 commented on GitHub (Mar 13, 2025):

+1

<!-- gh-comment-id:2720440783 --> @davidchi2020 commented on GitHub (Mar 13, 2025): +1
Author
Owner

@nazarewk commented on GitHub (Mar 13, 2025):

As a form of official update:

We are aware of the demand for internal IPv6 addressing schemes and are still willing to support it in the future.

Current state of IPv6 support is pretty much a proof of concept that never got properly finished & enabled due to:

  • requiring a large-scale refactor of the codebase to support IPv6 internally (it's "not so simple"),
  • being a small team,
  • trying to support as many types of devices as possible, a significant part of those still having trouble handling IPv6 (especially in preexisting infrastructures),
  • putting more emphasis on features requested by paid customers (none expressed need for IPv6 yet),

As a form of "voting" for the feature please give a thumbs up (or other reaction) on the original post instead of +1 comments :)

<!-- gh-comment-id:2720582132 --> @nazarewk commented on GitHub (Mar 13, 2025): As a form of official update: We are aware of the demand for internal IPv6 addressing schemes and are still willing to support it in the future. Current state of IPv6 support is pretty much a proof of concept that never got properly finished & enabled due to: - requiring a large-scale refactor of the codebase to support IPv6 internally (it's "not so simple"), - being a small team, - trying to support as many types of devices as possible, a significant part of those still having trouble handling IPv6 (especially in preexisting infrastructures), - putting more emphasis on features requested by paid customers (none expressed need for IPv6 yet), As a form of "voting" for the feature please give a thumbs up (or other reaction) on the original post instead of `+1` comments :)
Author
Owner

@doubtwheel commented on GitHub (Jun 30, 2025):

For anyone being blocked by this, I can recommend switching to netmaker or headscale. I prefered Netbird UI and ease-of-use, but if you need ipv6 that's the only way to go for now in the oss world

<!-- gh-comment-id:3020197050 --> @doubtwheel commented on GitHub (Jun 30, 2025): For anyone being blocked by this, I can recommend switching to netmaker or headscale. I prefered Netbird UI and ease-of-use, but if you need ipv6 that's the only way to go for now in the oss world
Author
Owner

@Darin755 commented on GitHub (Sep 2, 2025):

Y

As a form of official update:

We are aware of the demand for internal IPv6 addressing schemes and are still willing to support it in the future.

Current state of IPv6 support is pretty much a proof of concept that never got properly finished & enabled due to:

* requiring a large-scale refactor of the codebase to support IPv6 internally (it's "not so simple"),

* being a small team,

* trying to support as many types of devices as possible, a significant part of those still having trouble handling IPv6 (especially in preexisting infrastructures),

* putting more emphasis on features requested by paid customers (none expressed need for IPv6 yet),

As a form of "voting" for the feature please give a thumbs up (or other reaction) on the original post instead of +1 comments :)

You could make it a optional toggle

<!-- gh-comment-id:3246777899 --> @Darin755 commented on GitHub (Sep 2, 2025): Y > As a form of official update: > > We are aware of the demand for internal IPv6 addressing schemes and are still willing to support it in the future. > > Current state of IPv6 support is pretty much a proof of concept that never got properly finished & enabled due to: > > * requiring a large-scale refactor of the codebase to support IPv6 internally (it's "not so simple"), > > * being a small team, > > * trying to support as many types of devices as possible, a significant part of those still having trouble handling IPv6 (especially in preexisting infrastructures), > > * putting more emphasis on features requested by paid customers (none expressed need for IPv6 yet), > > > As a form of "voting" for the feature please give a thumbs up (or other reaction) on the original post instead of `+1` comments :) You could make it a optional toggle
Author
Owner

@sjansen1 commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2025):

Any timeframe for IPv6 Support? we currently running Headscale/Tailscale in our company. Due to compliance requirements and a merger next year, we like to get a new solution that has support and EntraID Group integration, Netbird almost fit this requirement. IPv6 is a big topic for us, most internal and cloud resources are IPv6 enabled and sometimes IPv6 only.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3269342695 --> @sjansen1 commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2025): Any timeframe for IPv6 Support? we currently running Headscale/Tailscale in our company. Due to compliance requirements and a merger next year, we like to get a new solution that has support and EntraID Group integration, Netbird almost fit this requirement. IPv6 is a big topic for us, most internal and cloud resources are IPv6 enabled and sometimes IPv6 only.
Author
Owner

@ebizboy commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2025):

+1

Thank you in advance

<!-- gh-comment-id:3310988319 --> @ebizboy commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2025): +1 Thank you in advance
Author
Owner

@NetHorror commented on GitHub (Dec 17, 2025):

You could simply add IPv6 support for the exit nodes. You already create tunnels for v4; you just need to add a v6 address to enable v6 exit nodes to be used as gateways.

However, if the client has IPv6 from their ISP, sites with IPv6 won't work over Netbird.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3666640099 --> @NetHorror commented on GitHub (Dec 17, 2025): You could simply add IPv6 support for the exit nodes. You already create tunnels for v4; you just need to add a v6 address to enable v6 exit nodes to be used as gateways. However, if the client has IPv6 from their ISP, sites with IPv6 won't work over Netbird.
Author
Owner

@DerDanilo commented on GitHub (Feb 22, 2026):

Missing IPv6 for exit nodes as well.

Without proper Ipv6 support Netbird is a blocker until it's supported.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3941788067 --> @DerDanilo commented on GitHub (Feb 22, 2026): Missing IPv6 for exit nodes as well. Without proper Ipv6 support Netbird is a blocker until it's supported.
Author
Owner

@sandroshu commented on GitHub (Feb 26, 2026):

+1

It's getting more important day-by-day.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3966953772 --> @sandroshu commented on GitHub (Feb 26, 2026): +1 It's getting more important day-by-day.
Author
Owner

@joachimtingvold commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2026):

Was looking at NetBird as well, but had to go for Headscale/Tailscale due to lack of IPv6-support in NetBird.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3985578335 --> @joachimtingvold commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2026): Was looking at NetBird as well, but had to go for Headscale/Tailscale due to lack of IPv6-support in NetBird.
Author
Owner

@MattXcz commented on GitHub (Mar 20, 2026):

+1 on ipv6 support

Also should possible to split ipv4 (dashboard) + ipv6 STUN/TURN and peers ip

<!-- gh-comment-id:4097131531 --> @MattXcz commented on GitHub (Mar 20, 2026): +1 on ipv6 support Also should possible to split ipv4 (dashboard) + ipv6 STUN/TURN and peers ip
Author
Owner

@hvisage commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2026):

I was SO hopeful as I saw it allowed me IPv6 in the routes...................... ;(

<!-- gh-comment-id:4185031530 --> @hvisage commented on GitHub (Apr 3, 2026): I was SO hopeful as I saw it allowed me IPv6 in the routes...................... ;(
Author
Owner

@TaNhoSy commented on GitHub (Apr 12, 2026):

I've merged several IPv6-enabled branches for both Netbird and dashboards.

Now I can configure peers to receive both IPv4 and IPv6 access; connected peers can use Wireguard over both IPv4 and IPv6.

However, I haven't seen support for IPv6 network ranges via Network Routes; only IPv4 is supported.

I'd like to know if any Netbird branches currently support IPv6 for Network Routes?

Haven't seen support for IPv6 network ranges via Network Routes:
Image

Connected peers can use Wireguard over both IPv4 and IPv6:
Image

<!-- gh-comment-id:4233301079 --> @TaNhoSy commented on GitHub (Apr 12, 2026): I've merged several IPv6-enabled branches for both Netbird and dashboards. Now I can configure peers to receive both IPv4 and IPv6 access; connected peers can use Wireguard over both IPv4 and IPv6. However, I haven't seen support for IPv6 network ranges via Network Routes; only IPv4 is supported. I'd like to know if any Netbird branches currently support IPv6 for Network Routes? Haven't seen support for IPv6 network ranges via Network Routes: ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a0f50cc8-0639-4633-bfdb-f3ac09189341) Connected peers can use Wireguard over both IPv4 and IPv6: ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/dc749396-918d-4a3d-9bcb-8369a77d78a1)
Author
Owner

@sjansen1 commented on GitHub (May 7, 2026):

That looks good, it just got merged today :)

https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/pull/5631

<!-- gh-comment-id:4396159950 --> @sjansen1 commented on GitHub (May 7, 2026): That looks good, it just got merged today :) https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/pull/5631
Author
Owner

@braginini commented on GitHub (May 8, 2026):

That looks good, it just got merged today :)

#5631

It did indeed and a release is coming :)

<!-- gh-comment-id:4405563303 --> @braginini commented on GitHub (May 8, 2026): > That looks good, it just got merged today :) > > [#5631](https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/pull/5631) It did indeed and a release is coming :)
Author
Owner

@TechHutTV commented on GitHub (May 26, 2026):

This was added 😄
https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/releases/tag/v0.71.0

<!-- gh-comment-id:4545469609 --> @TechHutTV commented on GitHub (May 26, 2026): This was added 😄 https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/releases/tag/v0.71.0
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: DYNR/netbird#126