Cannot access internal device using ipv6 pinholes

[EE5HT]

I have EE full fibre broadband and IPv6 is enabled using the EE Smart Hub Plus router. When I perform IP address checks it reports both IPv4 and public IPv6 address, (not a ULA or link-local address).

I wish to remotely connect to a server on my local network using the servers IPv6 address. I can successfully connect to the server remotely using it's IPv4 address using port forwarding on the router. But after opening a port in the IPv6 Pinholes menu does not allow me to connect remotely, the port is closed. I can connect to the server via its IPv6 address from my local network, but not from outside of my home.

When contacting EE support over the phone, I was told they would not help me, they can only help when the connection is not working

Has anyone managed to access an internal device from the internet using IPV6 pinholes?

[EE5HT · Accepted solution]

UPDATE 2: SOLVED!  🎉🍾

I had another frustrated experience trying to contact EE support but as soon as I started explaining the problem , I noticed the call center operator started becoming clueless when I mentioned IPv6 and firewall and after I explained how the internet worked, he put me on hold to speak to the "team lead", just to come back and say "we don't support whatever you are talking about", even if I mentioned the router is from EE and the network is from EE too

I then acquired a new router, the excellent Flint 2 (GL-MT6000) and it worked almost out of the box, which prompted me to throw the EE router in the recycle bin.

Conclusion: The EE routers are extremely low quality devices, ditto for the "technical" skill of the support operators

[JimM11]

@EE5HT At least you are up and going now, recycle bin not a good place when EE come to get it later and charge you for not being able to return there property!

[EE5HT]

Indeed, I soon realised they would charge for it and recovered the device  😀 

[bobpullen]

@JimM11 is right, I hope it's the metaphorical recycle bin and not the real one, else you risk falling foul of this at some point in the future 😕

The Flint devices are nice. I've a Beryl AX for travel, and the Flint 3 for tinkering. That said, the EE Pro does trump the Flint 3 for me when it comes to raw Wi-Fi performance/speeds. 

[EE5HT]

@bobpullen What test did you do to compare the performance between both routers?

[bobpullen]

@EE5HT - nothing overly scientific, mainly anecdotal observations from occasionally checking the PHY rate/running speedtests at various locations around my house. Most of that was done using my Wi-Fi 7 devices from memory. I suspect much of the difference might be down to the fewer antenna on the Flint 3 (I think your Flint 2 has more, it's just missing the WiFi 7/6GHz).

[EE5HT]

UPDATE 3:

Got official confirmation from an EE employee, that their routers have a bug in the IPv6 pinhole implementation, and that this would be followed up with the product manager responsible for the firmware.

[EE5HT]

Got it, I haven't noticed any performance difference between Flint 2 and Home Hub Plus. 

[TraderTravel]

After all of that, the IPv6 config simply does not work. I swear it did for a very short period, but nothing I do on the server side makes it work. I also have to admit I don't use my VPN that much, but when I need to use it, I definitely need it. It seems that EE's router refuses to expose IPv6 for Wireguard server and I have no idea why.

Seems definitely to be a software bug on the router side, but as I am on a beta version of the firmware and unable (nor do I want to) roll back, I am stuck where I am.

The IPv4 stack works a treat. It's just IPv6 that causes connectivity issues, but as soon as you enable IPv6, IPv4 stops working. This means I need to strip out the dual stack config and leave IPv4.

I will raise the above with EE, but I won't hold my breath on this one.

[bobpullen]

@TraderTravel - are you inferring that IPv6 pinholes were working on your Pro but aren't any more? As far as I recall, the functionality was broken across the board 🤔

Not well versed enough to offer comment on why enabling dual stack IPv6 at Wireguard server level would break IPv4 connectivity.

I also don't undertstand this from an earlier post: -

---

@TraderTravel wrote:

I have a wireguard server setup which I have setup to support IPv6 (and IPv4) to allow me remote access into my home network. This is important for me as if I use my mobile, EE use CGNAT on their mobile network meaning that IPv6 is the only way forward if I want to access anything in the house when I am not home.

---

Assuming the server is hosted at home and you're simply using a client to connect when out and about, then I'm not sure CGNAT has any bearing on things. I have two Wireguard tunnels hosted on my home network. I have IPv6 allocation disabled on the hub and I have never had any problems connecting to either Wireguard endpoint from the EE mobile network 🤷