Bruce A. Mah wrote:
Just to confirm, you're dealing with a gif(4) interface with an
explicitly-configured destination address and a 128-bit prefixlen, yes?
Yes. The specific line in my rc.conf is:
ipv6_ifconfig_gif0="2001:7b8:2ff:146::2 2001:7b8:2ff:146::1 prefixlen 128"
Maybe
there is something else involved too, for example the route command
itself?
Not sure what you mean by this exactly...???...
I mean that it may be that between -RELEASE and -STABLE, other things
have changed, e.g. network rc scripts, /sbin/route itself, etc, which
may also influence this behaviour. I'm sure more than only nd6.c
changed. :)
However, for me, with the whole system at -STABLE (as of Jan 11), I
verified the following results again just now:
nd6.c rev state
--------- -----
1.48.2.12 works
1.48.2.13 works
1.48.2.14 works
1.48.2.15 works
1.48.2.16 doesn't work
Here's what I've tested so far...in the table below, "work" means that
the host route to the destination got installed correctly and "no work"
means that it didn't.
Base Local Patch Result
---- ----------- ------
6.2-RELEASE Unmodified No work
6.2-RELEASE Revert nd6.c 1.48.2.{14,15} Work
6.2-STABLE Unmodified No work
6.2-STABLE Revert nd6.c 1.48.2.{14,15} Work
6.2-STABLE Revert nd6.c 1.48.2.16 No work
So strangely, this is different from my results... I can't install
6.2-RELEASE on the specific box, alas.
I'm going to write up an entry for the 6.2-RELEASE errata notes
documenting the existence of a problem and a workaround. We still need
to figure out exactly what the right fix is. Testing results from other
users (both 6.2-RELEASE and 6.2-STABLE) would be most welcome.
Just FYI, my initial alternative workaround was to use prefixlen 126,
e.g.:
ipv6_ifconfig_gif0="2001:7b8:2ff:146::2 prefixlen 126"
Cheers,
Dimitry
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
