Hello Robert!

Thanks for the reply. As you suggested, I tried tcpdump. BTW: This is all
happening on the actual network interface, not the loopback interface.

I can see a constant stream of these packets:

10:31:46.504046 IP6 2a04:52c0:101:7b1::.5344 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP,
length 138
10:31:48.502125 IP6 2a04:52c0:101:7b1::.60918 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP,
length 138
10:31:48.502518 IP6 2a04:52c0:101:7b1::.42225 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP,
length 138
10:31:48.502537 IP6 2a04:52c0:101:7b1::.33293 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP,
length 138
10:31:48.502647 IP6 2a04:52c0:101:7b1::.51209 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP,
length 138

2a04:52c0:101:7b1 is on the same network as my machine (technically, my ISP
gave me the address 2a04:52c0:101:162::/64, but I don't use it and haven't
configured the interface with it).

Every now and then I see this:

10:31:49.689606 IP6 ::1.52736 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP, length 139
10:31:49.690455 IP6 ::1.6771 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP, length 139
10:31:51.690739 IP6 ::1.52736 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP, length 139
10:31:51.691180 IP6 ::1.6771 > ff15::efc0:988f.6771: UDP, length 139

and this correlates perfectly with /var/log/messages:

[Thu Apr 22 10:31:49 CEST 2021 <  27.000723>] in6_setscope: can't set scope
for not loopback interface vioif0 and loopback address ::1
[Thu Apr 22 10:31:49 CEST 2021 <   0.000000>] in6_setscope: can't set scope
for not loopback interface vioif0 and loopback address ::1
[Thu Apr 22 10:31:51 CEST 2021 <   2.002278>] in6_setscope: can't set scope
for not loopback interface vioif0 and loopback address ::1
[Thu Apr 22 10:31:51 CEST 2021 <   0.000000>] in6_setscope: can't set scope
for not loopback interface vioif0 and loopback address ::1

So I see packets on my network interface (i.e. not the loopback interface)
with a source of ::1. I am waiting for a reply from my ISP if I am seeing
pink elephants or if there are actually such packets on the network.

Do you know if port 6771 is some well-known port in IPv6 for housekeeping?
The information I found seem to lean more to malware, and 2a04:52c0:101:7b1
might not be acting in good faith...?


On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 8:29 AM Robert Elz <[email protected]> wrote:

>     Date:        Wed, 21 Apr 2021 22:50:40 +0200
>     From:        =?UTF-8?Q?J=C3=B6rn_Clausen?= <[email protected]>
>     Message-ID:  <
> cabfsxqerxojlwtm63regtns5ofiaxv44e-va+r5zyzsoeo+...@mail.gmail.com>
>
>   | I am mostly ignorant to everything IPv6, so I have no clue what that
>   | message means, and I was not able to find any enlightenment online.
>
> IPv6 link local (and multicast, and sometimes some other) addresses
> have a "scope" in addition to the address itself.  That's because there
> is nothing in the address which indicates which interface it belongs
> to (no sub-net identifier or anything like that).
>
> The reference to ::1 in the messages is interesting, that's the v6
> equivalent of 127.0.0.1 in V4 - the loopback address, and should only
> be assigned to lo0 (but needs to be there).
>
>   | Is this something I can fix from inside the OS?
>
> Almost certainly.  There's probably something mis-configured.
>
> What is the status of the loopback interface (lo0) ?
>
> Mine looks like:
>
>         lo0: flags=0x8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 33624
>                 inet 127.0.0.1/8 flags 0x0
>                 inet6 ::1/128 flags 0x20<NODAD>
>                 inet6 fe80::1%lo0/64 flags 0x0 scopeid 0x3
>
>
>   | $ ifconfig vioif0
>   | vioif0: flags=0x8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
>   |         ec_capabilities=1<VLAN_MTU>
>   |         ec_enabled=0
>   |         address: 00:16:3e:b3:00:8a
>   |         inet 5.2.76.44/24 broadcast 5.2.76.255 flags 0x0
>   |         inet6 fe80::216:3eff:feb3:8a%vioif0/64 flags 0x0 scopeid 0x1
>
> Nothing looks wrong there
>
>         fe80::216:3eff:feb3:8a
>
> is your link local address on that interface, the "%vioif0" is the
> scope (and the /64 is essentially the netmask of course).
>
> While the changes at your ISP may have triggered something, and of
> course it is possible they're doing something incorrect or unusual, it
> is probably more likely that it is just different.
>
> You might want to capture a short sequence of packets on that interface
> to see what is happening, since the timestamps you included show the
> messages appearing several times a minute, capturing packets for just
> a minute or two should be enough to see if there's anything strange.
>
>         tcpdump -i vioif0 -s 1600 -w /tmp/packets.pcap ip6
>
> should do it, simply interrupt it after a couple of minutes.   Then you
> can use tcpdump -r or wireshark to look at the packets, or put the file
> somewhere it can be fetched.
>
> kre
>
>

-- 
Joern Clausen
https://www.oe-files.de/photography/

Reply via email to