Re: -soii not documented in hostname.if(5)
On 04/07/18 15:27, Jason McIntyre wrote: > > hi. > > sorry i'm a bit late to the party. did everything get cleared up? soii > is documented in ifconfig(8), as expected, and linked to from > hostname.if(5). it is not needed to be explicitly documented in > hostname.if(5). hope that's all clear. > Yup, I was too blind to see. The current upgrade guide for 6.3 explicitly points to ifconfig(8). Thanx very much for your support. Harri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: -soii not documented in hostname.if(5)
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 01:17:06PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > Hi folks, > > according to the upgrade guide I added "-soii" to hostname.re1. > It seems to work as expected, but it is not documented in > hostname.if(5). > > Would you mind to add this option to the man page? > > Except for changing the link local IPv6 addresses the upgrade > to 6.3 worked very well. No surprises, AFAICTBN. > > I highly appreciate your work on OpenBSD. > > > Regards > Harri > hi. sorry i'm a bit late to the party. did everything get cleared up? soii is documented in ifconfig(8), as expected, and linked to from hostname.if(5). it is not needed to be explicitly documented in hostname.if(5). hope that's all clear. jmc
Re: -soii not documented in hostname.if(5)
On 04/03/18 14:41, Florian Obser wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 01:17:06PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>
>> Except for changing the link local IPv6 addresses the upgrade
>
> Hmm? But you added -soii? So the link local v6 address should not have
> changed?
>
Indeed. I had expected that the RFC 7217 format is used only
for global routable IP addresses. I don't see a benefit for
link-local addresses in the new SLAAC format.
>> to 6.3 worked very well. No surprises, AFAICTBN.
>>
Actually there is a surprise: Apparently my OpenBSD gateway
cannot ping the traditional SLAAC addresses ("ff:fe") in the
internal network anymore (using the global routable IPv6 prefix).
Even if I disable the packet filter. 80/tcp and others are
affected, too.
The hosts with a RFC 7217 address can be pinged.
"netstat -nr -f inet6" shows both SLAAC styles, e.g.
Routing tables
Internet6:
Destination Gateway Flags
Refs UseMtuPrio Iface
default fe80::%pppoe0UGS
0 29832 - 8 pppoe0
::/96 ::1 UGRS
0 10 32768 8 lo0
::1 ::1 UHhl
1122 32768 1 lo0
:::0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS
0 0 32768 8 lo0
2002::/24 ::1 UGRS
0 0 32768 8 lo0
2002:7f00::/24 ::1 UGRS
0 0 32768 8 lo0
2002:e000::/20 ::1 UGRS
0 0 32768 8 lo0
2002:ff00::/24 ::1 UGRS
0 0 32768 8 lo0
2001:db8:b71c:d700::/56 ::1 UGRS
0 1 32768 8 lo0
2001:db8:b71c:d703::/64 2001:db8:b71c:d703::1UCn
168 - 4 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703::1 80:ee:73:95:c1:0dUHLl
0 9313 - 1 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:652:f3ff:feab:7480 link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:3612:98ff:fe77:d245 link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:40a0:1948:aaf:7d34 b0:e5:ed:ec:01:1cUHLc
0 233- 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:51d2:369f:fab2:18e9 f4:6d:04:73:ab:4eUHLc
0 13552 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:5ab0:35ff:fe81:5c86 link#3 UHLc
0 21 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:6ead:f8ff:fe82:d4c2 link#3 UHLc
0 22 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:7529:94e3:613d:bacb 6c:ad:f8:82:d4:c2UHLc
0 21061 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:7e2f:80ff:feb8:f0a link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:8689:adff:fed3:b078 link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:8e85:90ff:fe4e:b0a link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:8efa:baff:fea1:3b24 link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:a288:69ff:fe50:48d0 link#3 UHLc
0 68 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:b2e5:edff:feec:11c link#3 UHLc
0 15 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:e269:95ff:fe68:8077 link#3 UHLc
1 4413 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:f1d2:b843:31ed:1b17 58:b0:35:81:5c:86UHLc
0 40 - 3 re1
2001:db8:b71c:d703:f66d:4ff:fe73:ab4e link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
fe80::/10 ::1 UGRS
0 24 32768 8 lo0
fec0::/10 ::1 UGRS
0 0 32768 8 lo0
fe80::%re1/64 fe80::82ee:73ff:fe95:c10d%re1UCn
1119 - 4 re1
fe80::cb9:dd1e:67ab:6f0f%re134:12:98:77:d2:45UHLc
0 685- 3 re1
fe80::ccd:11ce:ac88:e7bc%re184:89:ad:d3:b0:78UHLc
0 306- 3 re1
fe80::d0b:6ccb:a4c0:167c%re1link#3 UHLc
0 14 - 3 re1
fe80::14ca:b397:2849:6750%re1 04:52:f3:ab:74:80UHLc
0 344- 3 re1
fe80::1881:5cc5:9b30:1530%re1 58:b0:35:81:5c:86UHLc
0 69 - 3 re1
fe80::1c92:4b17:8165:966b%re1 8c:fa:ba:a1:3b:24UHLc
0
Re: -soii not documented in hostname.if(5)
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 01:17:06PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > Hi folks, > > according to the upgrade guide I added "-soii" to hostname.re1. > It seems to work as expected, but it is not documented in > hostname.if(5). tb@ beat me to it :) I have no opinion one way or the other. Probably best to let jmc decide. I note however that -autoconfprivacy isn't mentioned either. > > Would you mind to add this option to the man page? > > Except for changing the link local IPv6 addresses the upgrade Hmm? But you added -soii? So the link local v6 address should not have changed? > to 6.3 worked very well. No surprises, AFAICTBN. > > I highly appreciate your work on OpenBSD. > > > Regards > Harri > -- I'm not entirely sure you are real.
Re: -soii not documented in hostname.if(5)
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 01:17:06PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > Hi folks, > > according to the upgrade guide I added "-soii" to hostname.re1. > It seems to work as expected, but it is not documented in > hostname.if(5). It is indirectly documented in that it is one of those arguments that are passed to ifconfig(8) (as mentioned in the second paragraph of hostname.if(5)). The ifconfig manual has documentation on soii. I added a link to https://man.openbsd.org/ifconfig#soii to the upgrade notes. > Would you mind to add this option to the man page? > > Except for changing the link local IPv6 addresses the upgrade > to 6.3 worked very well. No surprises, AFAICTBN. Thanks for the feedback. Good to know. > I highly appreciate your work on OpenBSD. > > > Regards > Harri >
-soii not documented in hostname.if(5)
Hi folks, according to the upgrade guide I added "-soii" to hostname.re1. It seems to work as expected, but it is not documented in hostname.if(5). Would you mind to add this option to the man page? Except for changing the link local IPv6 addresses the upgrade to 6.3 worked very well. No surprises, AFAICTBN. I highly appreciate your work on OpenBSD. Regards Harri
