Re: ipv6 via he.net connectivity issues - possible regression?
Hi, This is no longer an issue with latest snapshot. Best regards, Pedro Caetano A sexta, 13/12/2019, 14:05, Pedro Caetano escreveu: > Hi David, thank you for your reply > > I will test that and report back. > > > Best regards, > Pedro Caetano > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:27 PM David Gwynne wrote: > >> aggr(4) didn't exist in OpenBSD 6.6, so maybe that's the difference. Does >> the problem go away if you use trunk(4) instead of aggr(4)? Alternatively, >> could you build a -current kernel and make sure you have >> src/sys/net/if_aggr.c r1.25 and see what effect that has? >> >> Cheers, >> dlg >> >> > On 13 Dec 2019, at 8:06 am, Pedro Caetano >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi misc, >> > >> > I'm running amd64 -current, snapshot #518. >> > >> > My router has 4 em(4) interfaces. >> > em0 provides ipv4 internet via vlan100 which is connected to ISP ont. >> > em1, em2, em3 are bonded using aggr(4) to a lacp capable switch. >> > >> > A /48 subnet is routed via gif(4) tunnel to he.net, then subnetted into >> > /64s. >> > >> > Three vlans exist on top of the aggr(4) device. >> > Ipv4 addresses are assigned by dhcpd(8), ipv6 addresses are assigned by >> > rad(8). >> > >> > Hosts can acquire ip via rad(8), but are unable to access the internet >> > unless the gateway is pinged. >> > Hosts are also unreachable from the internet. >> > >> > Unfortunately I cannot tell precisely when this behavior started, but I >> > guess this was not an issue on 6.5. >> > >> > Please let me know if any more information is needed. >> > >> > Best regards, >> > Pedro Caetano >> >>
Re: ipv6 via he.net connectivity issues - possible regression?
Hi David, thank you for your reply I will test that and report back. Best regards, Pedro Caetano On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:27 PM David Gwynne wrote: > aggr(4) didn't exist in OpenBSD 6.6, so maybe that's the difference. Does > the problem go away if you use trunk(4) instead of aggr(4)? Alternatively, > could you build a -current kernel and make sure you have > src/sys/net/if_aggr.c r1.25 and see what effect that has? > > Cheers, > dlg > > > On 13 Dec 2019, at 8:06 am, Pedro Caetano > wrote: > > > > Hi misc, > > > > I'm running amd64 -current, snapshot #518. > > > > My router has 4 em(4) interfaces. > > em0 provides ipv4 internet via vlan100 which is connected to ISP ont. > > em1, em2, em3 are bonded using aggr(4) to a lacp capable switch. > > > > A /48 subnet is routed via gif(4) tunnel to he.net, then subnetted into > > /64s. > > > > Three vlans exist on top of the aggr(4) device. > > Ipv4 addresses are assigned by dhcpd(8), ipv6 addresses are assigned by > > rad(8). > > > > Hosts can acquire ip via rad(8), but are unable to access the internet > > unless the gateway is pinged. > > Hosts are also unreachable from the internet. > > > > Unfortunately I cannot tell precisely when this behavior started, but I > > guess this was not an issue on 6.5. > > > > Please let me know if any more information is needed. > > > > Best regards, > > Pedro Caetano > >
Re: ipv6 via he.net connectivity issues - possible regression?
aggr(4) didn't exist in OpenBSD 6.6, so maybe that's the difference. Does the problem go away if you use trunk(4) instead of aggr(4)? Alternatively, could you build a -current kernel and make sure you have src/sys/net/if_aggr.c r1.25 and see what effect that has? Cheers, dlg > On 13 Dec 2019, at 8:06 am, Pedro Caetano > wrote: > > Hi misc, > > I'm running amd64 -current, snapshot #518. > > My router has 4 em(4) interfaces. > em0 provides ipv4 internet via vlan100 which is connected to ISP ont. > em1, em2, em3 are bonded using aggr(4) to a lacp capable switch. > > A /48 subnet is routed via gif(4) tunnel to he.net, then subnetted into > /64s. > > Three vlans exist on top of the aggr(4) device. > Ipv4 addresses are assigned by dhcpd(8), ipv6 addresses are assigned by > rad(8). > > Hosts can acquire ip via rad(8), but are unable to access the internet > unless the gateway is pinged. > Hosts are also unreachable from the internet. > > Unfortunately I cannot tell precisely when this behavior started, but I > guess this was not an issue on 6.5. > > Please let me know if any more information is needed. > > Best regards, > Pedro Caetano
