Re: IPFW/IPv6 problem with JAIL: JAIL cannot ping -6 host until host first pings jail (ipv6)

Main Host has IPFW configured and is open for services like OpenLDAP on > > UDP/TCP and ICMP > > (ipfw is configured via rc.conf in this case, host is listening on both > > protocol families > > IPv4 and IPv6). > > > > The host itself has openldap-server 2.

Re: route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

> On Jan 9, 2024, at 6:24 PM, void wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:07:30PM -0800, Enji Cooper wrote: >> >> Was the kernel/utility built with IPv6? If not, that’s a general bug which >> should be filed (which can be easily checked/avoided using the FEATURES(9

Re: route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

> On Jan 9, 2024, at 7:17 AM, void wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 12:24:40PM +, void wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:24:53AM +, void wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:07:30PM -0800, Enji Cooper wrote: >>>> >>>> Was th

Re: route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 12:24:40PM +, void wrote: On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:24:53AM +, void wrote: On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:07:30PM -0800, Enji Cooper wrote: Was the kernel/utility built with IPv6? If not, that’s a general bug which should be filed (which can be easily checked

Re: route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:24:53AM +, void wrote: On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:07:30PM -0800, Enji Cooper wrote: Was the kernel/utility built with IPv6? If not, that’s a general bug which should be filed (which can be easily checked/avoided using the FEATURES(9) subsystem)… Cheers! -Enji

Re: route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 01:07:30PM -0800, Enji Cooper wrote: Was the kernel/utility built with IPv6? If not, that’s a general bug which should be filed (which can be easily checked/avoided using the FEATURES(9) subsystem)… Cheers! -Enji world/kernel was built with WITHOUT_INET6= in /etc

Re: route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

route [-j jail] [-46dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] > route: bad keyword: inet6 > route: usage: route [-j jail] [-46dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] > route: bad keyword: inet6 > route: usage: route [-j jail] [-46dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] > route: bad keyword: inet6 > r

Re: IPFW/IPv6 problem with JAIL: JAIL cannot ping -6 host until host first pings jail (ipv6)

for services like OpenLDAP on > UDP/TCP and ICMP > (ipfw is configured via rc.conf in this case, host is listening on both > protocol families > IPv4 and IPv6). > > The host itself has openldap-server 2.6 as a service. The host's interface is > igb0 with > assigned ULA

IPFW/IPv6 problem with JAIL: JAIL cannot ping -6 host until host first pings jail (ipv6)

is listening on both protocol families IPv4 and IPv6). The host itself has openldap-server 2.6 as a service. The host's interface is igb0 with assigned ULA. JAILs (around eight jails) are sharing their vnet interfaces via a bridge with the same physical device as the host (igb0). After a while

route ipv6 errors on bootup in -current main-n267425-aa1223ac3afc on arm64

46dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] route: bad keyword: inet6 route: usage: route [-j jail] [-46dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] route: bad keyword: inet6 route: usage: route [-j jail] [-46dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] Updating motd:. Creating and/or trimming log files. ### Why is it erroring for ipv6 when theres no ipv6 in rc.conf? I've not tried an amd64 -current system yet. --

Re: bridge(4) and IPv6 broken?

Patrick M. Hausen: > > Am 02.01.2024 um 13:56 schrieb Jan Bramkamp : > > IPv6 enabled interfaces need a link-local address for normal > > operation. Please set the auto-linklocal flag on the bridge and try > > again. > > And remove the link-local address from alc0.

Re: bridge(4) and IPv6 broken?

Hi all, > Am 02.01.2024 um 13:56 schrieb Jan Bramkamp : > > IPv6 enabled interfaces need a link-local address for normal operation. > Please set the auto-linklocal flag on the bridge and try again. And remove the link-local address from alc0. A bridge member must not have any layer

Re: bridge(4) and IPv6 broken?

On 02.01.24 00:40, Lexi Winter wrote: hello, i'm having an issue with bridge(4) and IPv6, with a configuration which is essentially identical to a working system running releng/14.0. ifconfig: lo0: flags=1008049 metric 0 mtu 16384 options=680003 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask

Re: bridge(4) and IPv6 broken?

Am 2024-01-02 00:40, schrieb Lexi Winter: hello, i'm having an issue with bridge(4) and IPv6, with a configuration which is essentially identical to a working system running releng/14.0. ifconfig: lo0: flags=1008049 metric 0 mtu 16384 options=680003 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask

bridge(4) and IPv6 broken?

hello, i'm having an issue with bridge(4) and IPv6, with a configuration which is essentially identical to a working system running releng/14.0. ifconfig: lo0: flags=1008049 metric 0 mtu 16384 options=680003 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128

Re: epair/vbridge: no IPv6 traffic egress until first IPv6 packet flows in

the hosts's interface > igb0 (I350-T2 two > port Gigabit Network Connection ) is member of that bridge and so a couple of > epair(4) devices > belonging to a couple of jails. > > On epairs as well as on the main hosts igb0 NIC, both IPv4 and IPv6 are > configured, IPv6 uses > U

epair/vbridge: no IPv6 traffic egress until first IPv6 packet flows in

g_level: 6 net.link.ether.ipfw: 0 On epairs as well as on the main hosts igb0 NIC, both IPv4 and IPv6 are configured, IPv6 uses ULA and setup doesn't has anything fancy. Pinging and connecting to hosts "outside" the box of the host in question (all FreeBSD CURRENT/14-STABLE) is possible withou

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

Hello all! After one year I was in need to use ipv6 on wireless and everything is working ok. I'm running 15-CURRENT: --- wlans_iwlwifi0="wlan0" create_args_wlan0="wlanmode sta regdomain ETSI country PT" ifconfig_wlan0_ipv6="inet6 accept_rtadv" ifconfig_wlan0=&qu

Re: IPFW: IPv6 and NPTv6 issues: multiple IPv6 addresses confuses IPFW

Am Sun, 19 Feb 2023 13:30:13 +0300 "Andrey V. Elsukov" schrieb: > 18.02.2023 18:42, FreeBSD User пишет: > > On a 24 hour basis, the ISP changes the IPv4 and IPv6 on the WAN > > interface. We use NPTv6 to translate ULA addresses for the inner > > IPv6 networks.

Re: IPFW: IPv6 and NPTv6 issues: multiple IPv6 addresses confuses IPFW

18.02.2023 18:42, FreeBSD User пишет: On a 24 hour basis, the ISP changes the IPv4 and IPv6 on the WAN interface. We use NPTv6 to translate ULA addresses for the inner IPv6 networks. We use IPv6 privacy on the tun0 interface. The router/firewall is operating after a reboot or restart of mpd5

IPFW: IPv6 and NPTv6 issues: multiple IPv6 addresses confuses IPFW

Hello, running a small nanoBSD firewall/router appliance, the WAN interface (tun0) is confugred via SLAAC when it comes to IPv6. The allpliance is running in-kernel compiled IPFW. The OS is FreeBSD 13-STABLE, compiled on a recuurant weekly basis. On a 24 hour basis, the ISP changes the IPv4

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

> --- > wlans_iwlwifi0="wlan0" > create_args_wlan0="wlanmode sta regdomain ETSI country PT" > ifconfig_wlan0_ipv6="inet6 accept_rtadv" > ifconfig_wlan0="WPA DHCP" > rtsold_enable="YES" > --- > and no carrier. > > Think we

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

e to wait a little more and see if people that use ifwwifi driver do some tests on ipv6. Thanks, Shawn Webb escreveu no dia sábado, 13/08/2022 à(s) 21:21: > On Sun, Aug 07, 2022 at 06:16:20PM +0100, Nuno Teixeira wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Due to ISP changes I was force

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

On Sun, Aug 07, 2022 at 06:16:20PM +0100, Nuno Teixeira wrote: > Hello, > > Due to ISP changes I was forced to use ipv6 on my re0 ethernet so I can > have a funcional internet. > > Now I'm trying to get ipv6 on iwlwifi (AX201) with /etc/rc.conf: > --- > wlans_iwlwifi0=&qu

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

Hi, Without "ifconfig_re0=“DHCP" re0 assumes only an ipv6 address and looses internal 192.168.1.xxx ipv4 address. No connection to internet. I've used ifconfig_wlan0="WPA" instead of ifconfig_wlan0="WPA SYNCDHCP" and no carrier. Bob Bishop escreveu no dia sábado

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

Hi, > On 12 Aug 2022, at 13:00, Nuno Teixeira wrote: > > Hi Merek, > >> If you are connecting to IPv6 only WLAN than you can probably either >> disable DHCP (if the RDNSS is provided for this network): >> ifconfig_wlan0="WPA up" >> or install

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

Hi Merek, If you are connecting to IPv6 only WLAN than you can probably either > disable DHCP (if the RDNSS is provided for this network): > ifconfig_wlan0="WPA up" > or install dhcp client capable of acquiring DHCPv6 lease and use it > instead of standard dhclient(8) from

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

W dniu 11.08.2022 o 17:53, Nuno Teixeira pisze: Hello Bjoern! /etc/rc.conf: --- wlans_iwlwifi0="wlan0" create_args_wlan0="wlanmode sta regdomain ETSI country PT" ifconfig_wlan0_ipv6="inet6 accept_rtadv" ifconfig_wlan0="WPA SYNCDHCP" rtsold_enable="

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

wer 30 bmiss 7 scanvalid 60 protmode CTS wme roaming MANUAL bintval 0 parent interface: iwlwifi0 media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect (autoselect) status: no carrier nd6 options=23 --- (a) this is unlikely related to IPv6? The only thing that wou

Re: [iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

On Sun, 7 Aug 2022, Nuno Teixeira wrote: Hi, Due to ISP changes I was forced to use ipv6 on my re0 ethernet so I can have a funcional internet. Now I'm trying to get ipv6 on iwlwifi (AX201) with /etc/rc.conf: --- wlans_iwlwifi0="wlan0" create_args_wlan0="wlanmode sta regdomain

[iwlwifi] ipv6 connection problem

Hello, Due to ISP changes I was forced to use ipv6 on my re0 ethernet so I can have a funcional internet. Now I'm trying to get ipv6 on iwlwifi (AX201) with /etc/rc.conf: --- wlans_iwlwifi0="wlan0" create_args_wlan0="wlanmode sta regdomain ETSI country PT" ifconfig_wlan0_ipv6

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On 03.05.22 19:08, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 09:49:48AM +0200, Florian Smeets wrote: F> On 23.04.22 01:38, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: F> >Hi Florian, F> > F> > here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not F> > yet committing it,

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 09:49:48AM +0200, Florian Smeets wrote: F> On 23.04.22 01:38, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: F> >Hi Florian, F> > F> > here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not F> > yet committing it, it might be not final. F> F>

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On 23.04.22 01:38, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: Hi Florian, here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not yet committing it, it might be not final. Hi Gleb, yes, the patch resolves the issue. There is just one SYN packet, and it gets a reply immediately. Thanks, Florian

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

> On 23. Apr 2022, at 02:24, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > Michael, > > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 01:54:25AM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote: > M> > here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not > M> > yet committing it, it might be not final. > M&g

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

> On 23. Apr 2022, at 01:38, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > Hi Florian, > > here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not > yet committing it, it might be not final. Hi Gleb, when I was looking at the code, I was also wondering if it would make more sense t

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

Michael, On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 01:54:25AM +0200, Michael Tuexen wrote: M> > here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not M> > yet committing it, it might be not final. M> M> when I was looking at the code, I was also wondering if it would make M>

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 09:19:57AM -0400, Michael Butler wrote: M> > Michael, can you please confirm or decline that you see the packets M> > that are dropped when you tcpdump on lo0? M> M> All the jails are aliased to share a single bridge interface. That M> results in the route to each jail

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

Hi Florian, here is a patch that should help with the IPv6 problem. I'm not yet committing it, it might be not final. -- Gleb Smirnoff diff --git a/sys/netinet6/ip6_input.c b/sys/netinet6/ip6_input.c index 3a13d2a9dc7..625de6d3657 100644 --- a/sys/netinet6/ip6_input.c +++ b/sys/netinet6

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On 4/16/22 01:22, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: Hi Florian, Hi Michael, On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 06:11:13PM -0400, Michael Butler wrote: M> >> I can reproduce this locally, will try to figure out what is going on. M> >> If you can bisect it, it would be great. M> > M> > Found the culprit

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On 16.04.22 07:22, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: Hi Florian, Hi Michael, Hi Gleb, thanks for looking into it. On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 06:11:13PM -0400, Michael Butler wrote: M> > M> > Found the culprit 1817be481b8703ae86730b151a6f49cc3022930f. And indeed M> > toggling

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

Hi Florian, Hi Michael, On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 06:11:13PM -0400, Michael Butler wrote: M> >> I can reproduce this locally, will try to figure out what is going on. M> >> If you can bisect it, it would be great. M> > M> > Found the culprit 1817be481b8703ae86730b151a6f49cc3022930f. And indeed

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

> On 16. Apr 2022, at 00:05, tue...@freebsd.org wrote: > >> On 15. Apr 2022, at 23:39, Florian Smeets wrote: >> >> On 15.04.22 21:24, tue...@freebsd.org wrote: >>>> On 15. Apr 2022, at 20:20, Florian Smeets wrote: >>>> >>>> >&g

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On 4/15/22 17:39, Florian Smeets wrote: On 15.04.22 21:24, tue...@freebsd.org wrote: On 15. Apr 2022, at 20:20, Florian Smeets wrote: Hi, there seems to be an issue with local IPv6 TCP connections on main. I have been seeing this for a couple of months at least. pkg upgr on my webserver

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

> On 15. Apr 2022, at 23:39, Florian Smeets wrote: > > On 15.04.22 21:24, tue...@freebsd.org wrote: >>> On 15. Apr 2022, at 20:20, Florian Smeets wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> there seems to be an issue with local IPv6 TCP

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

On 15.04.22 21:24, tue...@freebsd.org wrote: On 15. Apr 2022, at 20:20, Florian Smeets wrote: Hi, there seems to be an issue with local IPv6 TCP connections on main. I have been seeing this for a couple of months at least. pkg upgr on my webserver hosting the pkg repo is very slow, all

Re: IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

> On 15. Apr 2022, at 20:20, Florian Smeets wrote: > > [bcc to net@ for wider exposure] > > Hi, > > there seems to be an issue with local IPv6 TCP connections on main. I have > been seeing this for a couple of months at least. pkg upgr on my webserver > hosting the

IPv6 TCP: first two SYN packets to local v6 unicast addresses ignored

[bcc to net@ for wider exposure] Hi, there seems to be an issue with local IPv6 TCP connections on main. I have been seeing this for a couple of months at least. pkg upgr on my webserver hosting the pkg repo is very slow, all other hosts can connect to the pkg repo just fine. So IPv6

IPv6: rtadvd never propagates prefix

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, running a small homebrewn FreeBSD 13-STABLE based router/ipfw applance on an APU2C4. WAN interface is tun0 (physically attached to igb0, connected with a modem), opened via ppp (PPPoE). Situation: On IPv6 subnets (ULAs, fc50:baff::, fc50

Re: FreeBSD 13.0-RC1 ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 2942 on 1500 MTU

cket sizes if you disable it with "ifconfig vtnet0 > > -tso6"? Does it actually fix your IPv6 issue? -- Lars Schotte Mudroňova 13 92101 Piešťany ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinf

Re: FreeBSD 13.0-RC1 ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 2942 on 1500 MTU

, 2021-03-08 at 17:22 -0500, Ryan Stone wrote: > Hi Lars, > > Do you see the TSO6 option enabled on your vtnet interface? Do you > see normal packet sizes if you disable it with "ifconfig vtnet0 > -tso6"? Does it actually fix your IPv6 issue? -- Lars Schotte Mu

Re: FreeBSD 13.0-RC1 ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 2942 on 1500 MTU

Hi Lars, Do you see the TSO6 option enabled on your vtnet interface? Do you see normal packet sizes if you disable it with "ifconfig vtnet0 -tso6"? Does it actually fix your IPv6 issue? ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing

Re: FreeBSD 13.0-RC1 ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 2942 on 1500 MTU

It looks like vtnet driver ignored MTU setting on 13.0-RC1. I see this on both, IPv4 and IPv6 ... however IPv4 works maybe because DigitalOcean and Vultr do split those frames on KVM virt host, but don't do this for IPv6 (I suppose). Everything about this is strange but so far I have been able

FreeBSD 13.0-RC1 ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 2942 on 1500 MTU

Hey friends, I am running this FreeBSD 13.0-RC1 and I am experiencing strange Ethernet frame sizes, TCP sizes well above 2500 on an MTU of 1500. Somehow it seems that this problem only applies on IPv6, IPv4 works fine. I have seen some strange network behaviour with TCP connections randomly

Re: adding existing ipv6 network route returns ENOMEM instead of EEXIST if loopback route also exists

Hi, On 25/11/20 1:12 pm, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: 21.11.2020, 22:48, "Guy Yur" : Hi, When adding a route with a netmask, add_route() in route_ctl.c adds the route with destination address masked. If the add failed (for example, the route exists) it calls lookup_prefix() with the original

Re: adding existing ipv6 network route returns ENOMEM instead of EEXIST if loopback route also exists

21.11.2020, 22:48, "Guy Yur" : > Hi, > > When adding a route with a netmask, add_route() in route_ctl.c > adds the route with destination address masked. > If the add failed (for example, the route exists) it calls > lookup_prefix() with the original unmasked destination. Thank you for the report!

adding existing ipv6 network route returns ENOMEM instead of EEXIST if loopback route also exists

Hi, When adding a route with a netmask, add_route() in route_ctl.c adds the route with destination address masked. If the add failed (for example, the route exists) it calls lookup_prefix() with the original unmasked destination. In a scenario where a loopback route was added followed by the

Re: syslogd: using IPv6 as hostnames results in "IP mismatch"

Hi, > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 08:24:38 +0100 > "O. Hartmann" said: ohartmann> validate: dgram from IP ffdff:dead:beef::, port 514, name \ ohartmann> fdff:dead:beef::; ohartmann> rejected in rule 1 due to IP mismatch. The -a option was broken. It should be fixed now. Please,

Re: syslogd: using IPv6 as hostnames results in "IP mismatch"

Hi, > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 08:24:38 +0100 > "O. Hartmann" said: ohartmann> validate: dgram from IP ffdff:dead:beef::, port 514, name \ ohartmann> fdff:dead:beef::; ohartmann> rejected in rule 1 due to IP mismatch. The -a option was broken. It should be fixed now. Please try

Re: syslogd: using IPv6 as hostnames results in "IP mismatch"

Hi, > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 08:24:38 +0100 > "O. Hartmann" said: ohartmann> validate: dgram from IP ffdff:dead:beef::, port 514, name \ ohartmann> fdff:dead:beef::; ohartmann> rejected in rule 1 due to IP mismatch. The -a option was broken. It should be fixed now. Please try

Re: IPv6 RFC3041 temporary address broken?

On 12/02/19 11:03, Shawn Webb wrote: > Hey all, > > I have net.inet6.ip6.use_tempaddr and net.inet6.ip6.prefer_tempaddr > both set to 1. Yet, I'm not seeing temporary addresses created upon > receipt of a router advertisement. I'm only seeing the HostID-based > SLAAC IP be generated. Has

Re: IPv6 RFC3041 temporary address broken?

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:44:42AM -0200, Renato Botelho wrote: > On 12/02/19 11:03, Shawn Webb wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > I have net.inet6.ip6.use_tempaddr and net.inet6.ip6.prefer_tempaddr > > both set to 1. Yet, I'm not seeing temporary addresses created upon > > receipt of a router

IPv6 RFC3041 temporary address broken?

Hey all, I have net.inet6.ip6.use_tempaddr and net.inet6.ip6.prefer_tempaddr both set to 1. Yet, I'm not seeing temporary addresses created upon receipt of a router advertisement. I'm only seeing the HostID-based SLAAC IP be generated. Has something changed recently that would prevent RFC3041

Re: icmp (IPv4) issues with VIMAGE JAILs and IPv6

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:36:37 +0300 "Andrey V. Elsukov" wrote: > On 28.01.2019 15:44, O. Hartmann wrote: > > Stopping all jails, destroying all epairs and bridge0 doesn't change > > anything. The problems occured when IPv6 came into play on the specific > > host in

syslogd: using IPv6 as hostnames results in "IP mismatch"

IPv6 fdff:dead:beef::faaf and IP 192.168.168.200. The test client has IPv6 fdff:dead:beef:: and IP 192.168.168.2. On the syslog server: The syslog server's syslogd is configured as (etc/rc.conf): syslogd -C -v -v -b [fdff:dead:beef::faaf]:514 -b 192.168.168.200:514 \ -a [fdff:dead:beef::]/48

Re: icmp (IPv4) issues with VIMAGE JAILs and IPv6

On 28.01.2019 15:44, O. Hartmann wrote: > Stopping all jails, destroying all epairs and bridge0 doesn't change anything. > The problems occured when IPv6 came into play on the specific host in > question. > > Does anyone have any ideas? I'm out of ideas. Hi, I think I fo

Re: icmp (IPv4) issues with VIMAGE JAILs and IPv6

On 28.01.2019 15:44, O. Hartmann wrote: > Stopping all jails, destroying all epairs and bridge0 doesn't change anything. > > The problems occured when IPv6 came into play on the specific host in > question. > > Does anyone have any ideas? I'm out of ideas. Since your rul

Re: icmp (IPv4) issues with VIMAGE JAILs and IPv6

On 28 Jan 2019, at 12:44, O. Hartmann wrote: I ran into severe problems on CURRENT ( FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #193 r343521: Mon Jan 28 10:26:36 CET 2019 amd64), VIMAGE enabled host with jails utilizing IPv6. and you forget to mention in the subject that it seems to be an ipfw problem and thus

icmp (IPv4) issues with VIMAGE JAILs and IPv6

I ran into severe problems on CURRENT ( FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #193 r343521: Mon Jan 28 10:26:36 CET 2019 amd64), VIMAGE enabled host with jails utilizing IPv6. Scenario: The main host has two Braodcom (bce0|1) NICs. bce0 is the physical NIC attached to a routed/switched network for the main host

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

> On 3 Dec 2018, at 08:15, O. Hartmann wrote: > > > The documentation lacks in many aspects how to deal with IPv6, especially > when it comes > to "well known things from the old IPv4 world". Since DDNS also is still > something people > use with IP

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Am Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:32:52 + Gary Palmer schrieb: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:12:32PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > My ISP is offering IPv6 only "a

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

> > > >> As far as I know, with the IPv4 stack a IPv4 address is obtained > >> automatically, so I would expect the same for IPv6. > > > > The fun with "automatically" is that there's more than one way... > > DHCPv6 and NDP (IPV6 Neighbour

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

, but they are, in fact, statically assigned. In radius we assign IPv6 addresses. On the servers, we run this ifaceup script: #!/bin/bash # # Add a route to the interface, if appropriate. PATH=/sbin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH date=`date` interface="$1" authname="$5" route=`psql -t

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

## Bjoern A. Zeeb (bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net): > No, IPV6CP, to my very best 15 year old memory only negotiates the > interface identifiers, which are used to generate the link-local addresses. Ah, you're right - it's IPV6CP-then-NDP, not "IPV6CP or NDP". I got ahead of the protocol...

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

On 11/30/2018 7:12 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: > > For IPv6, I only see my local linklocal address, fe80::... > > Checking the log of ppp (/var/log/ppp.log), there is also a fe80:: > linklocal address > assigned to the variable HISADDR. Somehow, the tun0 never obtains a > IPv6 ap

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

On 30 Nov 2018, at 15:59, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: > ## O. Hartmann (ohartm...@walstatt.org): > >> As far as I know, with the IPv4 stack a IPv4 address is obtained >> automatically, so I would expect the same for IPv6. > > The fun with "automatically"

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

## O. Hartmann (ohartm...@walstatt.org): > As far as I know, with the IPv4 stack a IPv4 address is obtained > automatically, so I would expect the same for IPv6. The fun with "automatically" is that there's more than one way... DHCPv6 and NDP (IPV6 Neighbour Discovery

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:12:32PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > My ISP is offering IPv6 only "as an experimental feature", so I had to ask to > enable the > IPv6 stack on my connection. I'm using FreeBSD 12-STABLE

Re: ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

Hi, > On 30 Nov 2018, at 12:12, O. Hartmann wrote: > > Signed PGP part > My ISP is offering IPv6 only "as an experimental feature", so I had to ask to > enable the > IPv6 stack on my connection. I'm using FreeBSD 12-STABLE as the basis for a > router/firewall/PB

ipv6/ppp: FreeBSD obtains linklocal on tun0 only

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 My ISP is offering IPv6 only "as an experimental feature", so I had to ask to enable the IPv6 stack on my connection. I'm using FreeBSD 12-STABLE as the basis for a router/firewall/PBX system, FreeBSD's onboard ppp client is performing t

Re: IPv6 for local_unbound?

On 23 Sep 2018, at 22:10, David P. Discher wrote: I say yes, especially if we wish to support a IPv6 only system at some point in the future … which seemed to be a “think” of the few major IPv6 advocates in the industry. I guess best practice, this should suck in rc.* config files, and use

Re: IPv6 for local_unbound?

I say yes, especially if we wish to support a IPv6 only system at some point in the future … which seemed to be a “think” of the few major IPv6 advocates in the industry. I guess best practice, this should suck in rc.* config files, and use v6 if v6 is set via one of the ipv6_* variables

IPv6 for local_unbound?

Does it make sense to add an IPv6 localhost (::1) to our setup scripts for local_unbound? unbound is definitely listening on ::1 as well at 127.0.0.1 so things like "host -6" will work if we add it like this perhaps? --- /usr/sbin/local-unbound-setup 2018-09-20 21:47:41.0

Re: NFS via IPv6 between 11.2-REL amd64 and larger (>45 files) directories?

Hi! > As Rick told me there's a ongoing debate on this, here's a copy > from my mail to stable@: PR: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231050 -- p...@freebsd.org +49 171 3101372 2 years to go ! ___

Re: NFS via IPv6 between 11.2-REL amd64 and larger (>45 files) directories?

Hi! As Rick told me there's a ongoing debate on this, here's a copy from my mail to stable@: I've seen a strange effect: NFS via IPv6 between 11.2-REL amd64 boxes failed for directories with more than 45 files or directories. Small directories worked. It seems to be an issue with ipv6

Re: gif does not work when going over IPv6 on current

On 15.08.2018 23:47, Lars Schotte wrote: > Hey folks, > > when you create a gif with IPv6 tunnel endpoints > tcpdump on the underlying interface will show you some kind of error > that 0 != 6 and packets will be dropped. > > IP6 version error: 0 != 6 > repeating for eac

gif does not work when going over IPv6 on current

Hey folks, when you create a gif with IPv6 tunnel endpoints tcpdump on the underlying interface will show you some kind of error that 0 != 6 and packets will be dropped. IP6 version error: 0 != 6 repeating for each packet. happens only while sending. receiving works. This happens only on 12

Re: Recent changes in routing or IPv6 related parts?

Quoting Alexander Leidinger (from Sun, 27 May 2018 21:12:17 +0200): Quoting Chris H (from Tue, 22 May 2018 09:59:04 -0700): Hello, Alexander. I'm not sure if this landed in -CURRENT. I only know it landed in 11. But your trouble might be related to pr #224247 :

Re: Recent changes in routing or IPv6 related parts?

m time to time, and if it fails do some ifconfig down/up. If the ping doesn't work afterwards, reboot. Most of the time this worked. Now I see a change in behavior, the scripts kicks in, all is ok for the script afterwards, but internally (inside the machine) I can't reach ipv6 jails. The s

Re: Recent changes in routing or IPv6 related parts?

reboot. Most of the time this worked. Now I see a change in behavior, the scripts kicks in, all is ok for the script afterwards, but internally (inside the machine) I can't reach ipv6 jails. The system is reachable externally (only tested so far is the main host-IP). The setup is vim

Recent changes in routing or IPv6 related parts?

he script afterwards, but internally (inside the machine) I can't reach ipv6 jails. The system is reachable externally (only tested so far is the main host-IP). The setup is vimage based, several jails (via iocage) on epairs connected via bridge to the NIC. One bridge for IPv6, one for

Re: panic "wlock already held" when changing ipv6 default route

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov <melif...@freebsd.org> wrote: > 25.03.2016, 02:11, "Guy Yur" <guy...@gmail.com>: >> Hi, >> >> When changing the ipv6 default route I get a panic on wlock already held. >> Could be related

Re: panic "wlock already held" when changing ipv6 default route

On Fri, 25 Mar 2016, Guy Yur wrote: Hi, When changing the ipv6 default route I get a panic on wlock already held. Could be related to r293424 lock changes, haven't checked an older version yet. route add -inet6 default fe80::7 route change -inet6 default fe80::7 Hmm undependent of the bug

Re: panic "wlock already held" when changing ipv6 default route

25.03.2016, 02:11, "Guy Yur" <guy...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > When changing the ipv6 default route I get a panic on wlock already held. > Could be related to r293424 lock changes, haven't checked an older version > yet. Hi, Yes, there is a problem when the d

panic "wlock already held" when changing ipv6 default route

Hi, When changing the ipv6 default route I get a panic on wlock already held. Could be related to r293424 lock changes, haven't checked an older version yet. route add -inet6 default fe80::7 route change -inet6 default fe80::7 panic: rw_rlock: wlock already held for rib head lock @ /usr/src/sys

Re: IPV6 TCP6 Slow Connect

se you need. I **CAN** supply accesss to a @FreeBSD.org developer to: 1) the FreeBSD 11 host 2) the FreeBSD(pfSense) Firewall 3) the IPv6 host (FreeBSD 10) that I ssh'd to. 4) the FireWall in front of the FreeBSD 10 box (also pfSense) -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.or

Re: IPV6 TCP6 Slow Connect

On 2016-02-12 08:13, Larry Rosenman wrote: On 2016-02-12 08:02, Kristof Provost wrote: On 12 Feb 2016, at 10:18, Larry Rosenman wrote: On 2016-02-11 20:50, Larry Rosenman wrote: On 2016-02-11 14:40, Larry Rosenman wrote: On 2016-02-11 14:25, Kristof Provost wrote: On 11 Feb

Re: IPV6 TCP6 Slow Connect

> On 12 Feb 2016, at 10:18, Larry Rosenman wrote: > > On 2016-02-11 20:50, Larry Rosenman wrote: >> On 2016-02-11 14:40, Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> On 2016-02-11 14:25, Kristof Provost wrote: >>> On 11 Feb 2016, at 21:23, Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> From which

Re: IPV6 TCP6 Slow Connect

t; at http://www.lerctr.org/~ler/FreeBSD/win10.pcap > > http://www.lerctr.org/~ler/.FreeBSD/fbsd11.pcap > > Please let me know what else you need. > > I **CAN** supply accesss to a @FreeBSD.org developer to: > > 1) the FreeBSD 11 host > > 2) the FreeBSD(pfSense) Fir

Re: IPV6 TCP6 Slow Connect

29-6961 > >> > >> at http://www.lerctr.org/~ler/FreeBSD/win10.pcap > >> > >> http://www.lerctr.org/~ler/.FreeBSD/fbsd11.pcap > >> > >> Please let me know what else you need. > >> > >> I **CAN** supply accesss to a @FreeBSD.org devel

  1   2   3   4   5   >