On Mon, Nov 02 2015 19:03:34 +0200, Lauri Tirkkonen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 02 2015 17:47:04 +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > On 02/11/15(Mon) 16:29, Lauri Tirkkonen wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 02 2015 15:10:07 +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > > Could you include the output of "netstat -rnf inet6" before and after > > > > enabling autoconf on your interface? > > > > > > Sure. > > > > Thanks. Sadly I don't see anything useful here and cannot reproduce the > > bug. Could you try cranking "net.inet6.icmp6.nd6_debug" and see if you > > get any info when autoconfiguring your interface? > > Not really. Just output about successful DAD not finding any duplicates:
I might've spoken too soon. I do get a bunch of 'NS packet from non-neighbor' when actually trying to use the interface, but I suppose that's more of a symptom of the on-link route missing than the cause: nd6_ns_input: NS packet from non-neighbor nd6_ns_input: src=2001:708:20:e336::1 nd6_ns_input: dst=ff02:1::1:ff02:2a23 nd6_ns_input: tgt=2001:708:20:e336:1497:d53b:5d02:2a23 tgt is the autoconfprivacy address currently in use for this host, and src is the static address on the non-carp interface of the router. These solicitations don't get answered (I assume because they're from "non-neighbor", since there is no on-link route to src), and v6 connectivity to the router fails, which was the problem I initially set out to investigate. The discussion leads me to think that there might be a bug with rtadvd not including the src lladdr option when run on a carp interface. However, Linux and illumos machines on this same network do get the appropriate 2001:708:20:e336::/64 route added by default (and consequently communicate succesfully) - is the fact that the route is not being added (when the src lladdr is missing in the rtadv) possibly another bug? -- Lauri Tirkkonen | lotheac @ IRCnet
