Yes i was talking about my cable modem requiring the reboot. Again i am not sure if this is still going to be the case with it in bridge mode. I think i will monitor and see if the condition arises first.
Yes @danabw, my ER-4 router is solid and i have made sure it is on the latest FW from ui.com
I may not have stated it clearly enough in my original post.
Correct, when i reboot my cable modem, the IPv6 tunnel does not get restored through the router - only the IPv4 tunnel comes up.
To tell you the truth i am not sure if i ever had this running when i was just using the cable modem as a router or not.
Tried using the commands in the CLI window on the edgerouter:
release dhcp interface eth0
renew dhcp interface eth0
And i am going to have to repeat this procedure to confirm, but i believe the eth0 did get the IPv6 assigned, but eth1 did not. Maybe i just need another command on eth1 after this.
BUT then i was wondering about Telnet and just though i would throw out the question. I have been reading a little more about the Telnet interface on the ER-4 and i am not sure at this point, but the Telnet interface 'may' be limited to the console port.
Background - why i installed a router
Two months ago i was having connectivity issues (finally resolved after six weeks and the cable company finally swapping out the box down the street). Of course step one of any ISP issue is to reboot the modem. At the beginning this appeared to 'fix' the issue so over the course of a week it was happening quite regularly. It's a real PIA when the DHCP host goes away and you can talk to anything on your network (including the IoT/tasmota devices that HE controls. So i bought a ER-X and after a week upgraded to a ER-4.
Why i want to have IPv6 running
Last week my son (21 yr old now home again after graduating college) said when he is hosting a game server, others are getting lags. That's not the word he used but that's how i heard it. Digging in a bit IPv4 of course uses NAT. Not a surprises, i knew this. On my ER-X i had offloaded this to HW but with the extra uP power in the ER-4 i didn't think it was necessary so i enabled it. This improved the issue.
Then more reading and i realized that using IPv6 doesn't require NAT (of course). Yeah overall the packet is a little more top heavy, it decrease route time. More reading to figure out the DHCPv6 "to PD or not PD" and my ISP supports it so i got that setup as well. I am still not 100% sure on the /48 or /56 or /64. I believe my ISP supports /64 but i was getting an out of range error so dropped back to /56.
So the 'lag' complaints are now gone. all good.