Feature Request: internal IPv6 support #30

@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"

@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" ```

saavagebueno commented

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

+1

@guedressel commented on GitHub (Jan 4, 2024): +1

saavagebueno commented

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

+1

@felixls commented on GitHub (Feb 3, 2024): +1

saavagebueno commented

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

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

@FlintyLemming commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2024): True, I can not establish connection directly via IPv6 at all.

saavagebueno commented

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

any update?

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

saavagebueno commented

@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?

@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?

saavagebueno commented

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

+1

@agafonovim commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2024): +1

saavagebueno commented

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

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

@Gunni commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2024): I would like this as well, i would prefer only using IPv6 on the overlay network.

saavagebueno commented

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

+1

@Mr-Pi commented on GitHub (Feb 7, 2025): +1

saavagebueno commented

@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.

@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.

saavagebueno commented

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

+1

@fruworg commented on GitHub (Feb 18, 2025): +1

saavagebueno commented

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

+1

@davidchi2020 commented on GitHub (Mar 13, 2025): +1

saavagebueno commented

@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 :)

@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 :)

saavagebueno commented

@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

@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

saavagebueno commented

@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

@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

saavagebueno commented

@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.

@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.

saavagebueno commented