Hi Cédric, I think I find the machine with a RA route. (It is the original machine in the first mail)
# ip a show enp0s25 2: enp0s25: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000 link/ether 00:24:7e:05:42:32 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 10.66.71.67/23 brd 10.66.71.255 scope global dynamic enp0s25 valid_lft 85595sec preferred_lft 85595sec inet6 2620:52:0:4246:224:7eff:fe05:4232/64 scope global mngtmpaddr dynamic valid_lft 2591915sec preferred_lft 604715sec inet6 fe80::224:7eff:fe05:4232/64 scope link valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever # ip -6 r unreachable ::/96 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable 2002:a00::/24 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable 2002:7f00::/24 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable 2002:a9fe::/32 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable 2002:ac10::/28 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable 2002:c0a8::/32 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 unreachable 2002:e000::/19 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 2620:52:0:4246::/64 dev enp0s25 proto kernel metric 256 expires 2591970sec unreachable 3ffe:ffff::/32 dev lo metric 1024 error -113 fe80::/64 dev enp0s25 proto kernel metric 256 default via fe80::26e9:b3ff:fe23:44cd dev enp0s25 proto ra metric 1024 expires 1770sec hoplimit 64 default via fe80::26e9:b3ff:fe0f:654d dev enp0s25 proto ra metric 1024 expires 1657sec hoplimit 64 I think it is because there is 2 items for the single interface enp0s25. And I don't know why there are 2 link local address. Could you please help? Thank you~ Best Regards, Yalan Zhang IRC: yalzhang Internal phone: 8389413 On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Yalan Zhang <yalzh...@redhat.com> wrote: > I have no RA route set. > I will try, Thank you very much! > > Best Regards, > Yalan Zhang > IRC: yalzhang > Internal phone: 8389413 > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Cedric Bosdonnat <cbosdon...@suse.com> > wrote: > >> On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 13:30 +0800, Yalan Zhang wrote: >> > I'm sorry that I missed the mail. >> >> 没关系 >> >> > But currently I can not reproduce it. >> > For the error by net-create, it is executed when I set accept_ra to 1. >> >> That sounds more normal. net-create and net-start are triggering the >> same code in the end. >> >> > I have just test on libvirt-3.2.0-4.el7.x86_64, the behavior changes, >> it seems like there is no check for accept_ra >> > before start a network with ipv6. >> > >> > 1. define and start a network with ipv6 settings >> > # virsh net-dumpxml default6 >> > <network> >> > <name>default6</name> >> > <uuid>c502d02c-fbd0-49d9-91e4-0fcf0ef159d0</uuid> >> > <forward mode='nat'/> >> > <bridge name='virbr4' stp='on' delay='0'/> >> > <mac address='52:54:00:04:d5:3c'/> >> > <ip address='192.168.10.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'> >> > <dhcp> >> > <range start='192.168.10.2' end='192.168.10.254'/> >> > </dhcp> >> > </ip> >> > <ip family='ipv6' address='2001:db8:ca2:2::1' prefix='64'> >> > <dhcp> >> > <range start='2001:db8:ca2:2:1::10' end='2001:db8:ca2:2:1::ff'/> >> > </dhcp> >> > </ip> >> > </network> >> > >> > # cat /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/enp0s25/accept_ra >> > 1 >> > >> > # virsh net-start default6 =====> the network can start as well with >> accept_ra=1 >> > Network default6 started >> > >> > It seems that the "virNetDevIPGetAcceptRA()" in patch "network: check >> accept_ra before enabling ipv6 forwarding" >> > with commit 00d28a78 is not executed when I start a network. Please >> help to check, Thank you. >> >> It won't complain at all if there is no RA route set on the host. >> To reproduce, you need to setup a machine acting as an ipv6 router >> with radvd on the guest network. >> >> Do you actually have an RA route for the enp0s25 device? You can check >> it by running `ip -6 r`. These routes are indicated with 'proto ra' >> >> -- >> Cedric >> > >
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list