Re: ifconfig lo1 down
lördagen den 5 mars 2011 21.10.19 skrev Sergey Kandaurov: On 5 March 2011 21:43, fredrik danerklint fre...@fredan.se wrote: Hi, I would like to know what is the differents between ip4 and ip6 for this command. First: #ifconfig lo1 lo1: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384 options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM inet xx.xx.xx.2 netmask 0x inet6 2a03:::::xx02 prefixlen 128 nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.010 ms ^C and $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.053 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C Now we run this command: # ifconfig lo1 down and trying to ping again: $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ^C --- xx.xx.xx.2 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss works as expected (and this is what I want) but this command, however: $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.048 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.033 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=2 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C --- 2a03:::::xx02 ping6 statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.032/0.038/0.048/0.007 ms My question is why is it not the same behavior of ip6 as of ip4? That's how forwarding works/differs for ipv4 and ipv6. You should be able to ping xx.xx.xx.2 again after adding static route. Something like route add xx.xx.xx.2 -iface -lo1. I can only say for the moment that from my observation ipv4 routes to itself exist as far as interface is up, and ipv6 routes don't depend on if iface is up. You can check this with netstat -r for both addresses with iface up and down. Hmm... take a look at this: Internet: DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire xx.xx.xx.2link#8 UH 00lo1 Internet6: Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire 2a03:::::xx02 link#8UHS lo0 See the differents? For ip4 it uses the correct interface, lo1, but on ip6 it uses the lo0 interface and sure enough it is not down at all. What have I missconfigured in rc.conf: cloned_interfaces=vlanxx lo1 ifconfig_lo1=inet xx.xx.xx.2/32 ipv6_ifconfig_lo1=2a03::xxx:::::xx02/128 -- //fredan ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ifconfig lo1 down
On 3/5/11 10:43 AM, fredrik danerklint wrote: Hi, I would like to know what is the differents between ip4 and ip6 for this command. First: #ifconfig lo1 lo1: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384 options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM inet xx.xx.xx.2 netmask 0x inet6 2a03:::::xx02 prefixlen 128 nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.010 ms ^C and $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.053 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C Now we run this command: # ifconfig lo1 down and trying to ping again: $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ^C --- xx.xx.xx.2 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss works as expected (and this is what I want) but this command, however: $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.048 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.033 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=2 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C --- 2a03:::::xx02 ping6 statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.032/0.038/0.048/0.007 ms My question is why is it not the same behavior of ip6 as of ip4? I think IPV6 realizes it's sending to itself and short circuits it.. also, show ipv6 routes ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ifconfig lo1 down
On Sun, 6 Mar 2011, fredrik danerklint wrote: Hi, lördagen den 5 mars 2011 21.10.19 skrev Sergey Kandaurov: On 5 March 2011 21:43, fredrik danerklint fre...@fredan.se wrote: Hi, I would like to know what is the differents between ip4 and ip6 for this command. First: #ifconfig lo1 lo1: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384 options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM inet xx.xx.xx.2 netmask 0x inet6 2a03:::::xx02 prefixlen 128 nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.010 ms ^C and $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.053 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C Now we run this command: # ifconfig lo1 down and trying to ping again: $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ^C --- xx.xx.xx.2 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss works as expected (and this is what I want) but this command, however: $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.048 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.033 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=2 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C --- 2a03:::::xx02 ping6 statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.032/0.038/0.048/0.007 ms My question is why is it not the same behavior of ip6 as of ip4? That's how forwarding works/differs for ipv4 and ipv6. You should be able to ping xx.xx.xx.2 again after adding static route. Something like route add xx.xx.xx.2 -iface -lo1. I can only say for the moment that from my observation ipv4 routes to itself exist as far as interface is up, and ipv6 routes don't depend on if iface is up. You can check this with netstat -r for both addresses with iface up and down. Hmm... take a look at this: Internet: DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire xx.xx.xx.2link#8 UH 00lo1 Internet6: Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire 2a03:::::xx02 link#8UHS lo0 See the differents? For ip4 it uses the correct interface, lo1, but on ip6 it uses the lo0 interface and sure enough it is not down at all. It's new-arp fallout and related to the carp problems with IPv6. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family.___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ifconfig lo1 down
söndagen den 6 mars 2011 21.29.30 skrev Bjoern A. Zeeb: On Sun, 6 Mar 2011, fredrik danerklint wrote: Hi, lördagen den 5 mars 2011 21.10.19 skrev Sergey Kandaurov: On 5 March 2011 21:43, fredrik danerklint fre...@fredan.se wrote: Hi, I would like to know what is the differents between ip4 and ip6 for this command. First: #ifconfig lo1 lo1: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384 options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM inet xx.xx.xx.2 netmask 0x inet6 2a03:::::xx02 prefixlen 128 nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.010 ms ^C and $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.053 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C Now we run this command: # ifconfig lo1 down and trying to ping again: $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ^C --- xx.xx.xx.2 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss works as expected (and this is what I want) but this command, however: $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.048 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.033 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=2 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C --- 2a03:::::xx02 ping6 statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.032/0.038/0.048/0.007 ms My question is why is it not the same behavior of ip6 as of ip4? That's how forwarding works/differs for ipv4 and ipv6. You should be able to ping xx.xx.xx.2 again after adding static route. Something like route add xx.xx.xx.2 -iface -lo1. I can only say for the moment that from my observation ipv4 routes to itself exist as far as interface is up, and ipv6 routes don't depend on if iface is up. You can check this with netstat -r for both addresses with iface up and down. Hmm... take a look at this: Internet: DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire xx.xx.xx.2link#8 UH 00 lo1 Internet6: Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire 2a03:::::xx02 link#8UHS lo0 See the differents? For ip4 it uses the correct interface, lo1, but on ip6 it uses the lo0 interface and sure enough it is not down at all. It's new-arp fallout and related to the carp problems with IPv6. ok. where can I read about this problem with carp (since that is what I also gonna to use later on with ip6..) Is there any kind of information about the status of ip6 in FreeBSD. I mean really a list of what works and what not works? -- //fredan ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ifconfig lo1 down
On Sun, 6 Mar 2011, fredrik danerklint wrote: It's new-arp fallout and related to the carp problems with IPv6. ok. where can I read about this problem with carp (since that is what I also gonna to use later on with ip6..) kern/153848 or ther last weeks on this list. Is there any kind of information about the status of ip6 in FreeBSD. I mean really a list of what works and what not works? Lots of things work, some individual bugs but probably no more than in other subsystems;-) It's more likely that you'll get a helpful answer in case you ask about the specific features you need. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
ifconfig lo1 down
Hi, I would like to know what is the differents between ip4 and ip6 for this command. First: #ifconfig lo1 lo1: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384 options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM inet xx.xx.xx.2 netmask 0x inet6 2a03:::::xx02 prefixlen 128 nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.010 ms ^C and $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.053 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C Now we run this command: # ifconfig lo1 down and trying to ping again: $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ^C --- xx.xx.xx.2 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss works as expected (and this is what I want) but this command, however: $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.048 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.033 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=2 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C --- 2a03:::::xx02 ping6 statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.032/0.038/0.048/0.007 ms My question is why is it not the same behavior of ip6 as of ip4? -- //fredan ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ifconfig lo1 down
On 5 March 2011 21:43, fredrik danerklint fre...@fredan.se wrote: Hi, I would like to know what is the differents between ip4 and ip6 for this command. First: #ifconfig lo1 lo1: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384 options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM inet xx.xx.xx.2 netmask 0x inet6 2a03:::::xx02 prefixlen 128 nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms 64 bytes from xx.xx.xx.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.010 ms ^C and $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.053 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C Now we run this command: # ifconfig lo1 down and trying to ping again: $ ping xx.xx.xx.2 PING xx.xx.xx.2 (xx.xx.xx.2): 56 data bytes ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ping: sendto: No route to host ^C --- xx.xx.xx.2 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss works as expected (and this is what I want) but this command, however: $ ping6 2a03:::::xx02 PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2a03:::::xx02 -- 2a03:::::xx02 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.048 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=1 hlim=64 time=0.033 ms 16 bytes from 2a03:::::xx02, icmp_seq=2 hlim=64 time=0.032 ms ^C --- 2a03:::::xx02 ping6 statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 0.032/0.038/0.048/0.007 ms My question is why is it not the same behavior of ip6 as of ip4? That's how forwarding works/differs for ipv4 and ipv6. You should be able to ping xx.xx.xx.2 again after adding static route. Something like route add xx.xx.xx.2 -iface -lo1. I can only say for the moment that from my observation ipv4 routes to itself exist as far as interface is up, and ipv6 routes don't depend on if iface is up. You can check this with netstat -r for both addresses with iface up and down. -- wbr, pluknet ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
