Hello Christopher,
Am Mon, 6 May 2019 21:57:09 +0200 schrieb "Christopher Klinge" <christ.kli...@web.de>: > shouldn't these two rules work as well? > > ip route add <remote public ipv6>/64 via 1111:1::1 > ip route add <remote public ipv6>/0 dev<own internet interface> > > According to my knowledge thus far, linux should pick routes based on > specificity. Since /0 is more specific than /64, it should pick that rule > whenever the remote public ipv6 is targeted directly. Yes, that is my understanding, too. I think, the culprit is here: ip route add <remote public ipv6>/0 dev<own internet interface> I think, it should be the following instead: ip route add <remote public ipv6>/0 via <your_local_default_gateway> (I think, your "dev" route will lead to ARP requests on the local interface for public IP addresses - they obviously cannot resolve) Please note that my comments above are only based on my understanding of IPv4. Thus I may have missed some nuances of IPv6 ... Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ tinc mailing list tinc@tinc-vpn.org https://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc
