Hello,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 10:31:36PM -0400, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, July 10, 2022 06:48:10 PM Andy Smith wrote:
> > Otherwise I'm afraid your claims about IPv6 so far have been quite
> > bizarre, on the level of "IPv6 ate my homework" or "my father was
> > killed by a 128
On 7/12/22 10:21, Lee wrote:
On 7/11/22, rhkramer wrote:
From the peanut gallery: I disabled IPv6 quite some time ago. I don't
recall how I did it, but I might have that information in my notes, somewhere.
The reason that I disabled it (which might not be totally logical) is that
in IPv4, I
On 7/11/22, rhkramer wrote:
>
> From the peanut gallery: I disabled IPv6 quite some time ago. I don't
> recall how I did it, but I might have that information in my notes, somewhere.
>
> The reason that I disabled it (which might not be totally logical) is that
> in IPv4, I have always had my com
rhkra...@gmail.com writes:
> I could not find (in the searching I did) equivalent functionality for IPv6,
> so
> I disabled IPv6 in hopes of keeping my systems (fairly) secure.
The equivalent to NAT in IPv6 is NAT, of course. It's not usually spoken
of much but for example my VPN provider does
On Sunday, July 10, 2022 06:48:10 PM Andy Smith wrote:
> Otherwise I'm afraid your claims about IPv6 so far have been quite
> bizarre, on the level of "IPv6 ate my homework" or "my father was
> killed by a 128-bit integer", and can't be taken seriously.
From the peanut gallery: I disabled IP
Hi Charles,
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 06:51:22PM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> it is up to you to housebreak your applications to use IPv4 first.
If you find yourself having to do this, something is probably
broken. Broken things do exist, but it is really quite rare. What
you've written here make
Hi Gene,
Before we go any further let's just remember that this thread was
started by someone wanting to disable IPv6 for no specific reason.
They had decided they needed to do so to fix some problem they were
having, when in fact they had ALREADY disabled IPv6, so there is no
possibility whatsoev
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022, Greg Wooledge wrote:
And every single piece of this discussion is irrelevant to the OP's
issue, which is that their MTA is apparently not listening on 127.0.0.1;25.
IPv6 is a red herring.
Yes, this is my fault for choosing an inappropriate Subject line. I will try
again
Jul 10, 2022, 05:43 by charlescur...@charlescurley.com:
> My /etc/default/named looks like:
>
> #
> # run resolvconf?
> RESOLVCONF=no
>
> # startup options for the server
> OPTIONS="-4 -u bind"
>
>
> That should do it.
>
> But all that does is tell named to use IPv4. It will still return IPv6
> ad
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022, Charles Curley wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:44:46 +0200 (CEST)
local10 wrote:
Jul 10, 2022, 00:51 by charlescur...@charlescurley.com:
I do it in part by
using my own resolver, BIND9, and having it return only IPv4
addresses.
How did you do it? I tried to start named
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:44:46 +0200 (CEST)
local10 wrote:
> Jul 10, 2022, 00:51 by charlescur...@charlescurley.com:
>
> > I do it in part by
> > using my own resolver, BIND9, and having it return only IPv4
> > addresses.
>
> How did you do it? I tried to start named with "-4" option to use
> o
Jul 10, 2022, 00:51 by charlescur...@charlescurley.com:
> I do it in part by
> using my own resolver, BIND9, and having it return only IPv4 addresses.
>
How did you do it? I tried to start named with "-4" option to use only ipv4 but
it refused to start with that option, IIRC.
Regards,
On 7/9/22 21:00, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 06:51:22PM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 15:59:48 -0400
gene heskett wrote:
Andy, you obviously don't live in ipv4 only territory. Until n-m or
whatever gets trained to auto switch to ipv4 if 6 fails, then we have
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 06:51:22PM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 15:59:48 -0400
> gene heskett wrote:
>
> > Andy, you obviously don't live in ipv4 only territory. Until n-m or
> > whatever gets trained to auto switch to ipv4 if 6 fails, then we have
> > no choice but to disab
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 15:59:48 -0400
gene heskett wrote:
> Andy, you obviously don't live in ipv4 only territory. Until n-m or
> whatever gets trained to auto switch to ipv4 if 6 fails, then we have
> no choice but to disable it if we want network connectivity of any
> kind outside of our own home
On 7/9/22 11:31, Andy Smith wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 04:52:27PM +0200, Roger Price wrote:
When I try to start fetchmail I get the error message
Jul 09 10:22:57 titan fetchmail[7286]:
reading message
mail...@rogerprice.org@mail.gandi.net:1 of 7
Am 09.07.22 um 16:14 schrieb Andy Smith:
> Sounds like you have a misconfiguration that should be fixed, rather
> than disabling IPv6 to work around it.
>
I do not know about this case, but there are still situations where
applications have problems with IPv6. For example the proprietary Citr
Am 09.07.22 um 15:52 schrieb Roger Price:
> because directory /proc/sys/net/ipv6 doesn't exist. What is the new way of
> disabling IPv6?
I did it recently just in the way you described on Debian 11.
--
http://www.cb-fraggle.de
Hello,
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 04:52:27PM +0200, Roger Price wrote:
> When I try to start fetchmail I get the error message
>
> Jul 09 10:22:57 titan fetchmail[7286]:
> reading message
> mail...@rogerprice.org@mail.gandi.net:1 of 7 (8954 octets)
>
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 04:52:27PM +0200, Roger Price wrote:
> Jul 09 10:22:57 titan fetchmail[7286]:
> Connection errors for this poll:
> name 0: connection to localhost:smtp [127.0.0.1/25] failed:
> Connection refused.
> name 1:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022, Andy Smith wrote:
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 03:52:03PM +0200, Roger Price wrote:
I would like to disable IPv6 adapters in order to persuade
fetchmail to talk to exim4.
Sounds like you have a misconfiguration that should be fixed, rather
than disabling IPv6 to work around it.
Hello,
On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 03:52:03PM +0200, Roger Price wrote:
> I would like to disable IPv6 adapters in order to persuade
> fetchmail to talk to exim4.
Sounds like you have a misconfiguration that should be fixed, rather
than disabling IPv6 to work around it.
> net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_
On 7/9/22 15:52, Roger Price wrote:
In a Debian 11 system, I would like to disable IPv6 adapters in order to
persuade fetchmail to talk to exim4. The advice generally given is to
add a line to /etc/sysctl.conf
net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_ipv6 = 1
and run sysctl -p as root. With Debian 11 th
In a Debian 11 system, I would like to disable IPv6 adapters in order to
persuade fetchmail to talk to exim4. The advice generally given is to add a
line to /etc/sysctl.conf
net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_ipv6 = 1
and run sysctl -p as root. With Debian 11 this generates the error message
sysct
24 matches
Mail list logo
