Great. I'm distressed I didn't remember the issue until I ran "git
blame" over the code when putting together debugging instructions.
Cheers,
Simon.
On 11/01/2019 08:47, Sandeep K M wrote:
> Thanks a lot Simon, that did the trick.
>
> The patch fixed the issue. I am able to see the reply messa
Thanks a lot Simon, that did the trick.
The patch fixed the issue. I am able to see the reply messages being sent
by server and the same being received by the client:
Jan 11 06:46:52 dnsmasq[4131]: started, version 2.78 DNS disabled
Jan 11 06:46:52 dnsmasq[4131]: compile time options: IPv6 GNU-ge
Thanks for the offer. I think there may be a simpler answer, worth
trying first.
Looking back through the git history, this looks like a bug introduced
into 2.78 by the patches for security problems found by Google, in 2017.
It was fixed for 2.79, by patch
http://thekelleys.org.uk/gitweb/?p=dn
Hi Simon,
Thanks again for the response.
I will be happy to be your tester :)
Its fairly a simple setup with two hosts and a switch. I can create this
any time you want.
Please provide me the instructions. I am using dnsmasq version 2.78.
Thanks
-Sandeep
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:33 PM Simon
On 04/01/2019 06:25, Sandeep K M wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks a lot for your prompt reply.
>
> Attached are the packet captures:
>
> 1. Packets exchanged between client and relay (client-relay.pcap)
> 2. Packets exchanged between relay and server (relay-server.pcap)
> 3. strace of dnsmasq (dns
Hi,
Its a very simple topology, I have tried to recreate the entire setup on a
different test bed. I still see the same issue:
root@Ubuntu4242:~# tail -f /tmp/dnsmasq
Jan 9 01:57:20 dnsmasq-dhcp[2695]: DHCPSOLICIT(eth1)
00:01:00:01:23:c8:76:d7:00:50:56:bd:57:ed
Jan 9 01:57:20 dnsmasq-dhcp[2695]
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 01:09:11PM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 7:32 PM Geert Stappers wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:34:03PM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> >
> > > Please let me know if any other information is needed.
> >
> > Not yet mentioned in this thread is working c
Hi,
As you suggested I added the IPv6 address 2020::2/120 manually to my client
using the below command:
*ip -6 addr add 2020::2/120 dev eth1*
when I pinged the server it failed :
*root@Ubuntu3481:~# ping6 -I 2020::2 1040::2PING 1040::2(1040::2) from
2020::2 : 56 data bytesping: sendmsg: Net
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:34:03PM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 3:59 PM Geert Stappers wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:47:11PM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 2:30 PM Geert Stappers wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 11:55:49AM +0530,
Hi,
These command output is what I have captured previously for my reference
before dissembling the setup. I tried to capture only the relevant
interface output but not all.
*I have recreated the setup and attached (ip-command-output.txt) is the
output of the commands that you have requested in f
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 02:47:11PM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 2:30 PM Geert Stappers wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 11:55:49AM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> > > [ ]
> > >
> > > Please let me know if any other information is required.
> >
> >
> > At the server
> >
> >
Hi,
Here are the output of the commands:
root@8320:~# *ip -6 addr*
49: m1s1p7: mtu 1500 state UNKNOWN qlen
1000
inet6 1040::2/120 scope global
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
inet6 fe80::480f:cf00:7af:8444/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 11:55:49AM +0530, Sandeep K M wrote:
> Attached are the packet captures:
>
> 1. Packets exchanged between client and relay (client-relay.pcap)
> 2. Packets exchanged between relay and server (relay-server.pcap)
> 3. strace of dnsmasq (dnsmasq.trace)
>
> Please let me know
Hi Simon,
Thanks a lot for your prompt reply.
Attached are the packet captures:
1. Packets exchanged between client and relay (client-relay.pcap)
2. Packets exchanged between relay and server (relay-server.pcap)
3. strace of dnsmasq (dnsmasq.trace)
Please let me know if any other information i
It would be useful to get full packet dumps rather than just tcpdump
output.
It would also be useful to run dnsmasq under strace and see what
syscalls it's making: that would tell use where the reply might be going.
Cheers,
Simon.
On 03/01/2019 07:41, Sandeep K M wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
