Re: Import dhcpcd(8) into FreeBSD base

Roy Marples wrote in <4516f415-939e-6374-45ce-df19a2ac6...@marples.name>: ro> On 07/08/2022 15:23, Hiroki Sato wrote: ro> > 1) Import dhcpcd and make it invoked via Other Configuration flag ro> > in RA for DHCPv6. This means that the rtsold daemon remains a ro&g

Re: Import dhcpcd(8) into FreeBSD base

"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote in : bz> >> In 1)+2), there is no POLA for users of other DHCPv6 clients such as bz> >> dhcp6c or ISC's dhclient -6. A full-blown dhcpcd configuration, bz> >> which replaces dhclient/rtsold, is still possible. The cons are that bz> >> this is a partial integrati

Re: Import dhcpcd(8) into FreeBSD base

"Ben Woods" wrote in : wo> If accepted, I would recommend a phased implementation such as that wo> suggested below - open to ideas. wo> wo> - 14.0 (and perhaps 13.2) - dhcpcd included but off by default wo> - (WITH_DHCPCD=on, but rc.conf/network.subr continue to use wo> - dhclient/rtsold). Rel

Re: Ipv6 neighbor limit

"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote in <3a46b5fe-93e3-40c8-99ea-76f3e03d5...@lists.zabbadoz.net>: bz> On 3 Sep 2020, at 12:48, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: bz> bz> > On 2020-09-03 14:34, Cristian Cardoso wrote: bz> >> Hi bz> >> Would anyone know if there is any limit in the FreeBSD kernel for IPv6 bz> >> neig

Re: ndp and routers with link-local addresses

Niclas Zeising wrote in : ze> On 2020-07-07 12:57, Hiroki Sato wrote: ze> > Niclas Zeising wrote ze> >in : ze> > ze> However, if the interface on the router facing the client network ze> > only ze> > ze> has a link-local (and no global unicast) ad

Re: Specifying link-local address in rc.conf

Niclas Zeising wrote in : ze> On 2020-07-07 12:02, Hiroki Sato wrote: ze> > Niclas Zeising wrote ze> >in <713e1f3e-4dd9-8dcf-c6d2-15c684bdc...@daemonic.se>: ze> > ze> Hi! ze> > ze> Is it possible to specify a link-local address in rc.conf, and get

Re: ndp and routers with link-local addresses

Niclas Zeising wrote in : ze> However, if the interface on the router facing the client network only ze> has a link-local (and no global unicast) address, NDP neighbor ze> discovery breaks. This is related to the prefix discovery, not neighbor discovery (L2-L3 address resolution) in NDP. In

Re: Specifying link-local address in rc.conf

Niclas Zeising wrote in <713e1f3e-4dd9-8dcf-c6d2-15c684bdc...@daemonic.se>: ze> Hi! ze> Is it possible to specify a link-local address in rc.conf, and get ze> only that link-local address? The following is a typical configuration if you want to disable EUI-64 LLA: ifconfig_vtnet0="inet ..

Re: routed && route6d removal proposal

"Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote in <273191592779...@mail.yandex.ru>: me> Hey, me> me> I would like to propose removal of sbin/routed and usr.sbin/route6d. I am still using both of them in production environments because they work well at least for my configurations and most of promising alt

Re: net.inet6.ip6.deembed_scopeid removal

"Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote in <645741592773...@mail.yandex.ru>: me> [re-sending email with as non-html] me> me> Hey, me> me> I would like to deprecate net.inet6.ip6.deembed_scopeid sysctl while me> leaving the current default behaviour. me> me> This sysctl controls whether IPv6 scope is emb

Re: Question about rtadvd

John-Mark Gurney wrote in <20200402211304.gz4...@funkthat.com>: jm> Fernando Gont wrote this message on Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 22:18 -0300: jm> > Folks, jm> > jm> > I'm playing with rtadvd, and I'm curious about a debug message I'm jm> > getting when specifying Route Information options. jm> > jm

Re: ifconfig prefer_source and IPv6 privacy extensions

Jan Behrens wrote in <20200313202833.cbbe8d1679ac0fd7a8078...@magnetkern.de>: jb> Dear all, jb> jb> I'm using FreeBSD 12.1 with an ISP that supports IPv6. I have IPv6 jb> privacy extensions enabled (ipv6_privacy="YES" in /etc/rc.conf which jb> sets net.inet6.ip6.prefer_tempaddr=1). jb> jb> Give

Re: Revisiting FreeBSD-SA-08:10.nd6 (or: avoiding IPv6 pain)

Dennis Kögel wrote in <523ba6cf-c2c3-4e55-b81c-cb8816e56...@neveragain.de>: dk> Hi, dk> dk> I‘ve spent quite some time debugging weird intermittent IPv6 dk> connectivity issues over the last few days. dk> dk> It turned out that net.inet6.icmp6.nd6_onlink_ns_rfc4861=1 fixed those dk> problems.

[Differential] D23788: DRAFT: ng_ksocket: IPv6 address parsing and unparsing

hrs requested changes to this revision. hrs added inline comments. This revision now requires changes to proceed. INLINE COMMENTS > ng_ksocket.c:319 > + > + for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) { > + u_long val; inet_pton in libkern should be used to parse an IPv6 address. Al

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

Roy Marples wrote in : ro> On 13/10/2019 20:32, Hiroki Sato wrote: ro> > Ben Woods wrote ro> >in ro> >: ro> > wo> On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 at 08:32, Ben Woods ro> > wrote: ro> > wo> As promised, I have completed my initial work to import dhcpcd

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

Ben Woods wrote in : wo> On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 at 08:32, Ben Woods wrote: wo> As promised, I have completed my initial work to import dhcpcd into FreeBSD wo> base, and it is ready for review, testing and comment at the link below. wo> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22012 wo> wo> As per the comment

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

Roy Marples wrote in : ro> On 11/10/2019 20:40, Hiroki Sato wrote: ro> > I do not have a strong objection on dhcpcd (I am using it on some of ro> > my FreeBSD boxes actually) but let me explain the reason why I chose ro> > wide-dhcp as the candidate. That is beca

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

Ben Woods wrote in : wo> On Thu, 16 May 2019 at 2:25 am, Hiroki Sato wrote: wo> wo> > wrote wo> > in <001e01d50b49$176104d0$46230e70$@gmail.com>: wo> > wo> > dr> Has anyone ever thought or considered integrating an IPv6 DHCP client wo> > in

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

Roy Marples wrote in : ro> > A dhcp Client is a necessary part of the OS (though a bit less so with ro> > IPV6) but the serer side can be a port. (as it is). ro> ro> How is FreeBSD handling DNSSL + RDNSS over IPv6RA? That's pretty ro> standard now and I don't see a userland compoenent for it.

Re: rpc.statd already ipv6 clean?

Mihir Luthra wrote in : lu> > lu> > lu> > I think you should learn TI-RPC API first. The nettype specifies a lu> > class of transport protocol, not address family. lu> > lu> > Thanks, I did some more research on TI-RPC today. lu> In `statd.c` what I see is in `create_service()`/`complete_ser

Re: rpc.statd already ipv6 clean?

Mihir Luthra wrote in : lu> > I think the project page has wrong information regarding rpc.statd. lu> > Although it is not clean from the viewpoint of transport independent, lu> > it works with IPv6. lu> > lu> > lu> I see, in file.c/procs.c , clnt_create() calls are hardcoded to "udp". Code

Re: rpc.statd already ipv6 clean?

Mihir Luthra wrote in : lu> Hi everyone, lu> lu> Just as mentioned in [1], rpc.statd is not ipv6 clean. lu> lu> Although I have been through the code, and didn't found any issues until lu> now. The code conditionally checks for ipv6/ipv4 everywhere and uses ipv6 lu> compatible functions. lu> lu

Re: Link flap for setting ether/MAC address

Anish wrote in : ak> Hi all, ak> Got a very basic question, why physical link is flapped when we set the ak> address ak> ak> # dmesg -c ak> # ifconfig ix1 ether 70:6d:15:1f:12:72 ak> ..wait.. ak> # dmesg ak> ix1: link state changed to DOWN ak> ix1: link state changed to UP ak> # ak> ak> is this

Re: testing rpc.statd

Mihir Luthra wrote in : lu> Although I saw a test.c [1] file in the directory. I was wondering if this lu> complete is the test suite for statd? I tried running `make test` but it lu> said `No such file or dir: test.c`. Am I doing something wrong here? No, it was broken. I fixed test.c in r3

Re: Several IPv6 routers and default gateway choice

Victor Sudakov wrote in <20190906035608.ga45...@admin.sibptus.ru>: va> Hiroki Sato wrote: va> > va> Can any IPv6 unicast or link-local address be configured as an anycast va> > va> address of a router? va> > va> > Yes. There is no restriction about add

Re: Several IPv6 routers and default gateway choice

Victor Sudakov wrote in <20190901141047.ga56...@admin.sibptus.ru>: va> Hiroki Sato wrote: va> > Another way to realize failover is to use a common anycast address on va> > multiple routers. For example, a router is always able to have va> > fe80::/64 as an an

Re: Several IPv6 routers and default gateway choice

Victor Sudakov wrote in <20190830021228.ga66...@admin.sibptus.ru>: va> Dear Colleagues, va> va> If a FreeBSD host receives router advertisements from several IPv6 va> routers, on a LAN segment, which would be chosen as the default gateway? One reachable router will be selected based on the de

Re: addrs capability of rtadvd?

"Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote in <7a7874fa-e663-4ec9-b349-c46d32982...@lists.zabbadoz.net>: bz> On 17 Aug 2019, at 6:03, John-Mark Gurney wrote: bz> bz> > I am setting up ipv6, and going through the guide at: bz> > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-ipv6.html#idp71931000 bz> > bz> > And noti

Re: rss tldr

Andriy Gapon wrote in <42d8cbd1-ad28-d5a2-ecec-218763e2d...@freebsd.org>: av> Is there any up-do-date documentation on RSS/FreeBSD ? av> I am looking -- for a friend :) -- for some simple things like: av> - is it enabled by default? if not, how to enable? FreeBSD supports RSS in device driver

Re: Preferring internal IPv6 source address over gif tunnel IP?

Viktor Dukhovni wrote in <20190731120705.gc24...@straasha.imrryr.org>: vi> 1. Point to point tunnel /128: vi> vi> cloned_interfaces="gif0" vi> create_args_gif0="tunnel " vi> ifconfig_gif0_ipv6="inet6 ::2 ::1 prefixlen 128" vi> ipv6_defaultrouter="::1" You do not need to us

Re: Is there an way for a program to know when the list of network interfaces has changed (without rescanning them)?

Yuri wrote in : yu> I am asking because wireshark doesn't sense the interface list yu> changes, and it just always shows the list from the time it was yu> launched . You can open a routing socket and watch it to see if RTM_IFANNOUNCE message is coming. The following command lines (on two di

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

wrote in <006001d50b53$72a22e00$57e68a00$@gmail.com>: dr> > I have a plan to import wide-dhcp6 into the base system because it is simple dr> > enough. dr> dr> Thats nice! Any timeline for this; 13.0 RELEASE? Yes, at the latest. I originally planned it before 12.0 but not happened for som

Re: DHCPv6 client in base

wrote in <001e01d50b49$176104d0$46230e70$@gmail.com>: dr> Has anyone ever thought or considered integrating an IPv6 DHCP client in dr> base? I have a plan to import wide-dhcp6 into the base system because it is simple enough. dr> net/dhcp6 isn't really maintained anymore from the KAME days

[Differential] D19422: if_vxlan(4) Allow set MTU more than 1500 bytes.

hrs added a comment. Adding jumbo frame support looks good to me. However, is it better to support this in ether_ioctl() instead of a driver-specific ioctl handler? Check of (ifr->ifr_mtu > ETHERMTU) in ether_ioctl() can be changed to check if the interface has IFCAP_JUMBO_MTU or not. IN

Re: use of #ifdef INET and #ifdef INET6 in the kernel sources

Rick Macklem wrote in : rm> Rick Macklem wrote: rm> [stuff snipped] rm> >The AF_LOCAL code was in head for a short period of time before a vnode lock panic() rm> >issue was reported and I reverted the patch. rm> > rm> >Here is the commit log message for that reversion: rm> >PR#230752 shows a

Re: correct IP# for NFS kernel upcall to userland daemon

Rick Macklem wrote in : rm> In this case, I am concerned that the daemon will not be able to start up under rm> conditions where the DNS service isn't yet functional. (This problem can mostly rm> be avoided by specifying "localhost" in /etc/hosts and configuring the system to rm> use that f

Re: use of #ifdef INET and #ifdef INET6 in the kernel sources

"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote in <201902280158.x1s1wi7s053...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net>: fr> > fr> > I know both of these groups still do exist. fr> > fr> > Also every code not compiled in is not an attack surface, where you fr> > think it?s executed or not. fr> fr> This last reason is/was a prevelent

Re: IPv6: "xxx::x already configured" in logs... why?

Lawrence Stewart wrote in <56d1a947-a0a1-0297-7151-4e36ab53c...@freebsd.org>: ls> On 29/03/2017 21:49, Rui Paulo wrote: ls> > On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 21:46 -0500, Lawrence Stewart wrote: ls> >> [resurrecting an old thread] ls> >> ls> >> On 19/06/20

Re: fe80::1%lo0

Anton Yuzhaninov wrote in <94a99b96-808b-8f50-a4a3-eec865973...@citrin.ru>: ci> Hello, ci> ci> Why FreeBSD adds fe80::1%lo0 to the loopback interface? ci> ci> I know, that in IPv6 each interface should have a link-local address, ci> but ::1 can be considered as link-local: ci> https://tools.iet

Re: IPv6 works on em0 () but not on em1 () - what's wrong?,IPv6 works on em0 () but not on em1 () - what's wrong?

Lev Serebryakov wrote in <58756dde.5000...@freebsd.org>,<58756dde.5000...@freebsd.org>: le> le> I have MoBo (Supermicro X9SCL-F) with two 1G NICs, first one (em0) is le> based on 82579LM, and second one (em1) is based on 82574L. le> le> When I'm using em0 with simple config: le> le> ifconfig_

[Differential] D8904: inet: Fix routing issue by calling if_up()

hrs added a comment. The cause is that the prefix route was removed by in_scrubprefix() in the PRC_IFDOWN handler and never reinstalled upon PRC_IFUP because the reinstallation is done only for ifa passed to SIOCAIFADDR. Just calling if_up(ifp) looks too heavy to me because it causes extra

Re: How to configure another loopback device?

John Dison wrote in <788296467.1718144.1482676705...@mail.yahoo.com>: jd> Also one more thing which looks strange: if I use jd> ifconfig_lo1_ipv6="inet6 auto_linklocal", then ipv6 aliases on lo1 are jd> configured correctly, but there is no link-local address. If I jd> exclude this line from r

Re: How to configure another loopback device?

John Dison wrote in <252311393.1502179.1482604113...@mail.yahoo.com>: jd> > Does adding ifconfig_lo0="inet 127.0.0.1/8" to /etc/rc.conf work? jd> jd> Yes, adding ifconfig_lo0="inet 127.0.0.1/8" helps indeed. jd> jd> Interesting is that if I also add ifconfig_lo0_ipv6="inet6 ::1/128" jd> then ::

Re: How to configure another loopback device?

John Dison via freebsd-net wrote in <1404669989.1370681.1482573468...@mail.yahoo.com>: fr> > if your first IPs are say 192.168.1.1-2/32 and 2001:550:2:8::1e-f fr> fr> > Try without an alias0 for the first set of IPs fr> fr> > ifconfig_lo1="inet 192.168.1.1/32" fr> > ifconfig_lo1_ipv6="inet6 200

Re: Trouble with ipv6 routing through interface,Re: Trouble with ipv6 routing through interface

"Andrey V. Elsukov" wrote in ,: ae> On 16.12.2016 03:24, Anderson Soares Ferreira wrote: ae> > I have a freebsd 11 box running as my network gateway and I’m having ae> > some trouble trying to route ipv6 packets through an interface with ae> > only linklocal address. In short, what I’m doing i

Re: And what about ipv6_defaultrouter?

Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff wrote in <20160610205025.gg2...@box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu>: st> Hiroki Sato [2016-06-11 05:37 +0900] : st> st> > Unfortunately there is no documentation other than manual page st> > because this is a bit tricky. rc.conf(5) explains as foll

Re: And what about ipv6_defaultrouter?

Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff wrote in <20160610191828.ge2...@box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu>: st> Hiroki Sato [2016-06-10 22:50 +0900] : st> st> > A router does not accept RAs (more strictly, default route st> > information in RA) because it is a sender of RAs. However, som

Re: And what about ipv6_defaultrouter?

Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff wrote in <20160610071254.gc2...@box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu>: st> Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff [2016-06-10 08:52 +0200] : st> st> > 8< st> > ifconfig_vtnet0="DHCP" st> > ifconfig_vtnet0_ipv6="inet6 accept_rtadv" st> > rtsold_enable=

Re: DHCPv6 Support in FreeBSD Base

David Bright wrote in <6224ec83-3a81-4ce7-83c5-674628f38...@dell.com>: da> Following up on a conversation I started today at BSDCan da> 2016/DevSummit. da> da> I’d like to see support for DHCPv6 in the base system. I have made da> modifications to network.subr and the rc.d init scripts to allo

[Differential] [Commented On] D1986: Teach lagg(4) to change MTU

hrs added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS sys/net/if_lagg.c:753 Please separate a llq loop from a handler for per-port configuration. A llq traversal should be required only once in lagg_port_ops() if the handlers process a single lagg_llq entry. sys/net/if_lagg.c:837 Is this (llq == NULL),

Re: IPv6 Address as text (C)

Ken Moore wrote in <5668369f.9020...@pcbsd.org>: ke> Note: Please CC me on replies - I am not subscribed to this list. ke> ke> I am having a bit of trouble getting an accurate string representation ke> of the current IPv6 address for a given device using the C system ke> libraries and was wonde

Re: Cannot add an ipv6 route with -interface

Alarig Le lay wrote in <20151022230838.ga22...@drscott.swordarmor.fr>: al> Do you have any idea about this issue? Did I make a mistake or is it a al> bug? Is 2a00:5884::1/64 configured on em1? An address within 2a00:5884:8200::/40 is required on em1 in this case. -- Hiroki pgplf0mxAUESy.

[Differential] [Commented On] D1986: Teach lagg(4) to change MTU

hrs added a subscriber: hrs. hrs added a comment. It is true that this LOR is driver-specific but calling SIOCSIFMTU after acquiring a lock in lagg ioctl is not always safe. Change of lladdr suffers from the same situation and it was solved by using an asynchronous task queue to update address

PF_LOCAL support in getaddrinfo/getnameinfo

Hi, Is there any problem with adding PF_LOCAL support into getaddrinfo() and getnameinfo()? It was not standardized but can be implemented in a straight forward way (attached). Some old posts in mailing list archives (not for FreeBSD) said it was removed in glibc due to a security issue tha

Re: a couple /etc/rc.firewall questions

Don Lewis wrote in <201508240052.t7o0qsff002...@gw.catspoiler.org>: tr> > A TCP setup packet coming from a host on the internal LAN to the NAPT tr> > router falls into the last deny-all rule because it does not match if tr> > you added "out via ${oif}" to that rule. Does the following tr> >

Re: a couple /etc/rc.firewall questions

Don Lewis wrote in <201508222103.t7ml3gax000...@gw.catspoiler.org>: tr> The example /etc/rc.firewall has provisions to use either in-kernel NAT tr> or natd for the open and client firewall types, but the simple filewall tr> type only has code for natd. Is there any reason that in-kernel NAT tr

Re: IPv6 stacks responds to all node link local multicast NS

prabhakar lakhera wrote in : pr> Like I said before, it is not per RFC. It is trivial to derive solicited pr> node multicast address from the target IP, so If someone were to launch a pr> flood attack to poison cache entry for X host by sending Address resolution pr> request for all other local

Re: IPv6 stacks responds to all node link local multicast NS

prabhakar lakhera wrote in : pr> This probably is more of a compliance issue (or may be not as the NS pr> receipt section of RFC 4861 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861#page-62 does pr> not talk about it). pr> pr> The neighbor solicitation message format says this: pr> pr> http://tools.ietf.org

Re: Detaching the slave from the lagg interface which has vlan on top of it, hits an panic

Hariprasad S wrote in <26e3f92ec670bd429db5cb319d773c137a8...@nice.asicdesigners.com>: ha> HI, ha> ha> Detaching the slave from the lagg interface which has vlan on top of it, hits an panic. ha> Kernel used: FreeBSD HEAD r272051 ha> ha> Is anyone aware of this issue? Could you try r272547 o

Re: Configuration for IPv6 over tunnel

Dan Langille wrote in <14e3a97c-4fcb-4a2c-b22f-3d0849cec...@langille.org>: da> IPv6 Tunnel Endpoints da> Server IPv4 Address: 209.51.x.y da> Server IPv6 Address: 2001:470:xx06:9ea::1/64 da> Client IPv4 Address: 96.245.100.201 da> Client IPv6 Address: 2001:470:xx06:9ea::2/64 da> da> Routed /

Re: Should I be using ipv6_activate_all_interfaces or ip6addrctl_policy="ipv6_prefer"

John Hay wrote in <20140829101707.ga83...@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za>: jh> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:59:25AM +, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: jh> > jh> > On 27 Aug 2014, at 06:31 , Jonathan Price jh> > wrote: jh> > jh> > > On 2014-08-27 01:40, Peter Wemm wrote: jh> > >> On Tuesday 26 August 2014 10:

Re: Routing IPv6 packets towards oneself with routing sockets?

Fernando Gont wrote in <53e5b71d.2030...@gont.com.ar>: fe> > Although your code assumes RTA_GATEWAY eventually returns the fe> > outgoing interface, it is not always true. RTA_IFP should be used if fe> > you want to look up it instead of looking up gateways until AF_LINK fe> > is obtained.

Re: Routing IPv6 packets towards oneself with routing sockets?

Fernando Gont wrote in <53e35da7.4020...@gont.com.ar>: fe> Yes: fe> fe> Run it as: fe> bsd-lookup-simple -v IPV6_DEST_ADDR Hmm, I tried and it seems it worked as expected. "./bsd-lookup-simple -v fc00:1::1" returns RTA_DST wi

Re: Routing IPv6 packets towards oneself with routing sockets?

Hi, Fernando Gont wrote in <53e2b586.3080...@gont.com.ar>: fe> However, whenever I lookup an entry for fc00:1::1 with routing sockets, fe> the only entry I obtain is fc00:1::/64 (a network route) rather than fe> fc00:1::1/128 (a host route). As a result, I kind of have to figure out fe> that s

Re: IPv6: "xxx::x already configured" in logs... why?

Larry Rosenman wrote in <20140619140801.ga65...@thebighonker.lerctr.org>: le> > le> Ideas? (I may be an idiot, so any criticism welcomed). le> > le> le> > le> if you need the 1841's config, I can supply that as well. It's using a Hurricane le> > le> electric Tunnel. le> > le> > How frequent

Re: network.subr vlan handling broken

John Hay wrote in <20140619103513.ga92...@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za>: jh> Hi Guys, jh> jh> freebsd-rc did not react, so I'm just checking on -net too. jh> jh> I found after upgrading that vlan handling broke. I tried the following: jh> jh> vlans_bce1="6" jh> ipv4_addrs_bce1_6="inet 10.239.100.2/2

Re: IPv6: "xxx::x already configured" in logs... why?

Larry Rosenman wrote in <20140612202349.ga65...@thebighonker.lerctr.org>: le> I just started using IPv6 behind my (new to me) Cisco 1841. le> le> I see lots of: le> Jun 12 15:16:25 thebighonker kernel: in6_ifadd: 2001:470:1f0f:3ad:223:7dff:fe9e:6e8a is already configured le> le> in my /var/log

Re: IPv6 Source Address Selection in 9.x

Mark Kamichoff wrote in <20131014205824.gi25...@prolixium.com>: pr> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 05:45:15AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: pr> > Try ip6addrctl_policy="ipv6_prefer" in rc.conf. pr> pr> Excellent. Thank you. I glanced right over that in pr> /etc/defaul

Re: IPv6 Source Address Selection in 9.x

Mark Kamichoff wrote in <20131014203929.gg25...@prolixium.com>: pr> Hi - pr> pr> A colleague of mine recently stumbled upon an IPv6-related quirk in pr> FreeBSD that seems to have appeared in the 9.x series. ... pr> This behavior has been reproduced on 9.2, as well. It has not been seen pr>

Re: Why default route is not installed last?

Xin Li wrote in <521ba31c.5000...@delphij.net>: de> > That has always been specifically not supported. default route de> > needs to be directly attached. in fact the routing tables only ever de> > deliver the 'next hop' de> de> Well, depends on whether the 'next hop' is an IP or an interface.

Re: Why default route is not installed last?

Xin Li wrote in <521670ff.6080...@delphij.net>: de> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- de> Hash: SHA512 de> de> Hi, de> de> I've noticed that we do not install default route last (after other de> static routes). I think we should probably install it last, since the de> administrator may legiti

Re: CFR: FIB handling improvements

Will Andrews wrote in : wi> Please review: http://people.freebsd.org/~will/fix-fib-issues.1.diff wi> wi> This patch includes fixes for several issues relating to FIBs: wi> wi> * Use of dhclient with non-zero FIBs. With this patch, it is possible wi> to use DHCP on a specific interface with a n

Re: bce(4) panics, 9.2rc1 [redux]

Yonghyeon PYUN wrote in <20130731074341.gc1...@michelle.cdnetworks.com>: py> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 03:54:06PM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: py> > [Added yougari@ and davidch@ to the To:/Cc: list] py> > py> > I confirmed that my issue reported on -current@ is due

Re: bce(4) panics, 9.2rc1 [redux]

[Added yougari@ and davidch@ to the To:/Cc: list] I confirmed that my issue reported on -current@ is due to the bxe(4) driver (BCM57711). If it is disabled, shutdown works fine without NMI. Also, I received several reports about the same box that NMI occurred even on bge(4) (BCM5717) driver

Re: IPv6 NDP, static subnet entries

Georg Bege wrote in <1374226382.2820.1.camel@atwork>: th> Hello Hiroki th> th> Well I've got the subnet 2001:41d0:2:83a5::/64 and would like to route a th> portion of this - let's say 2001:41d0:2:83a5:100::/124 via an gif th> interface. th> The ISP is OVH, I heard it's known for broken setups l

Re: IPv6 NDP, static subnet entries

Georg Bege wrote in <1374064573.525.2.camel@atwork>: th> Hello FreeBSD users th> th> Im in need of proxying an NDP entry, th> due my bad provider using IPv6 bridging. th> My entire subnet is not routed correctly, however I managed to get it th> working with ndp -s proxy - sadly this doesnt wo

Re: Duplicate Address Detection misfire?

Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote in : zb> I have a FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE vmware guest running. It is using the zb> "bridged" type of networking with VMWare. It gets it's IPv4 address from zb> DHCP (successfully) and then fails to initialize IPv6. The relevant zb> rc.conf is: zb> zb> ipv6_activate_all_in

Re: Looking for a bgp listener that works with RADIX_MPATH / EQMP that's in HEAD

Peter Wemm wrote in : pe> I'm looking for pointers to something that can listen to bgp default pe> route announcements from two outbound gateways and set a RADIX_MPATH pe> compatible default route based on whether one or both are alive. pe> pe> openbgpd from ports is extremely incompatible with

Re: Making net.inet6.ip6.v6only=0 default

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote in : ji> > So I guess the question is: what do we do? It looks like we're in ji> > violation of both RFC 3493, Section 5.3 and POSIX 2008, Volume 2, Section ji> > 2.10.20*. ji> ji> ...aside from what FreeBSD should do for ip6.v6only, I personally ji> believe that real

RFC: if_bridge(4) ND6_IFF_AUTO_LINKLOCAL

Hi, I would like your comments about the attached patch. This allows IFT_BRIDGE interfaces to accept ND6_IFF_AUTO_LINKLOCAL and autoconfiguration of a link-local address with EUI-64 interface id. One thing I am concerned about is the case when the parent interface and the member interfaces

Re: [PATCH] stf(4) 6rd implementation

Ermal Luçi wrote in : er> Hello, er> er> at location [1] can be found a patch for making stf(4) understand 6rd. er> It supports variable masks for the ipv4 network as well. er> er> The patch has been tested on pfSense. er> It adds to new option to ifconfig for defining the 6rd border router a

Re: gre and MONITOR

Chip Marshall wrote in <20130508155446.gb95...@2bithacker.net>: ch> It appears the MONITOR flag doesn't work on gre interfaces. ch> ch> I have a GRE tunnel set up between a FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE box and a ch> Juniper router. ch> ch> Config on the FreeBSD end: ch> ch> gre0: flags=4b051 metric 0 m

Re: IPv6 configuration missunderstanding

Florent Peterschmitt wrote in <518bfbf6.4040...@peterschmitt.fr>: fl> Le 09/05/2013 21:19, Hiroki Sato a écrit : fl> > Florent Peterschmitt wrote fl> > in <518a6d5c.3030...@peterschmitt.fr>: fl> > fl> > fl> Hi, fl> > fl> fl> > fl&g

Re: IPv6 configuration missunderstanding

Florent Peterschmitt wrote in <518a6d5c.3030...@peterschmitt.fr>: fl> Hi, fl> fl> I want to configure IPv6 in FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE like this : fl> fl> ipv6_enable=yes fl> ipv6_activate_all_interfaces=yes fl> ifconfig_em0_ipv6="inet6 2001:41D0:8:B81f:: prefixlen 64" fl> -interface em0" fl> ipv6_d

Re: LOR in rtsock/ifnet

Mateusz Guzik wrote in <20121201223049.ga12...@dft-labs.eu>: mj> On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 06:54:36AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: mj> > Hiroki Sato wrote mj> > in <20121201.225004.2232262673795057435@allbsd.org>: mj> > mj> > hr> Mateusz Guzik wrote

Re: LOR in rtsock/ifnet

Hiroki Sato wrote in <20121201.225004.2232262673795057435@allbsd.org>: hr> Mateusz Guzik wrote hr> in <20121201133609.ga5...@dft-labs.eu>: hr> hr> mj> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:16:25PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: hr> mj> > Mateusz: are you sure it

Re: LOR in rtsock/ifnet

Mateusz Guzik wrote in <20121201133609.ga5...@dft-labs.eu>: mj> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:16:25PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: mj> > Mateusz: are you sure it's that commit? mj> > mj> mj> Yes, I double-checked right now. mj> mj> > I still get this in -HEAD: mj> > mj> mj> Maybe I expressed myself

Re: LOR in rtsock/ifnet

Rui Paulo wrote in <63c19ad8-ea8d-49a8-9e98-4235c4745...@freebsd.org>: rp> On 25 Nov 2012, at 23:35, Adrian Chadd wrote: rp> rp> > DO we know which commit triggered this? rp> rp> rp> I haven't bisected. I do not think my commit triggered it because it occurred in rt_msg2(). Andrey, can you

Re: net.inet6.icmp6.nd6_useloopback - what is it supposed to do?

Garrett Cooper wrote in : ya> Hi, ya> I've been TAHI testing FreeBSD 7.x sources for the past couple ya> months and over the course of my testing via the TAHI IPv6 conformance ya> test, I changed the knob value from net.inet6.icmp6.nd6_useloopback=1 ya> -> net.inet6.icmp6.nd6_useloopback=0

Re: [head tinderbox] failure on mips64/mips

Adrian Chadd wrote in : ad> On 17 November 2012 21:45, Hiroki Sato wrote: ad> ad> > ad> Fixed. Damn those pesky non-IPV6 belivers. ad> > ad> > Sorry, I was careless about this part. ad> ad> It's fine. :-) God, I so can't grill anyone for breaking th

Re: [head tinderbox] failure on mips64/mips

Adrian Chadd wrote in : ad> On 17 November 2012 18:35, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote: ad> ad> > cc -c -O -pipe -std=c99 -g -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign -fformat-extensions -Wmiss

Re: [PATCH] IPv6 and ICMP6 redirects - routing performance

"Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote in <5076c0e3.9050...@freebsd.org>: me> Hello list! me> me> Currently there are some unnecessary code residing in me> netinet6/in6_rmx.c causing performance degradation for IPv6 me> forwarding. me> me> Initially it was merged from netinet/in_rmx.c but it seems it i

Re: Restarting interfaces and routing table stickiness

Garrett Cooper wrote in : ya> Hi -net! ya> I've been doing some IPv6 testing lately, and one of the issues ya> that I've run into in the past (since at least 7.0-CURRENT) is that if ya> I do `service netif restart `, e.g. `service netif restart` ya> multiple times, and have addresses static

Re: IPv6 toolkit v1.2

Hi, Fernando Gont wrote in <5002e024.4090...@gont.com.ar>: fe> Folks, fe> fe> FYI, we've released "IPv6 toolkit v1.2": a set of IPv6 security fe> assessment tools that were produced as part of a project I carried out fe> on behalf of the UK CPNI. fe> fe> The tarball for version 1.2 of the tool

Re: svn commit: r238277 - in head: etc/defaults etc/rc.d sbin/ipfw share/man/man5 sys/netinet/ipfw

"Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote in <4ffa9723.5000...@freebsd.org>: me> On 09.07.2012 12:08, Hiroki Sato wrote: me> > "Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote me> >in<4ffa894d.9050...@freebsd.org>: me> > me> > I meant there was no st

Re: Hetzner.de IPv6 and FreeBSD -- default gateway is on other prefix, need to add static route before default -- how?

Lev Serebryakov wrote in <1606941405.20120429170...@serebryakov.spb.ru>: le> Hello, Freebsd-net. le> le> "Famous" dedicated server provider Hetzner provides native IPv6 for le> servers, but with rather strange routing configuration: you need to le> configure static interface route and make thi

Re: IPv6 and CARP

Damien Fleuriot wrote in <4f55e8b0.8010...@my.gd>: ml> Hello guys, ml> ml> ml> Are there any news on the topic ? ml> ml> Trying to push IP6 at work for our firewalls and struggling with CARP ml> interfaces with inet6 addresses at boot like OP. ml> ml> I could probably just set the address with

Re: ipv6 host inaccessible via route -inteface without ndp pairs

Mr Dandy wrote in <201202252213.50760.sub...@gmail.com>: su> Hi su> su> I play with IPv6 on the Hezner hosting. According to su> http://wiki.hetzner.de/index.php/Zusaetzliche_IP-Adressen/en information my su> rc.conf have (FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE/amd64): su> --- su> ipv6_activate_all_interfaces="YE

Re: Issue with multiple configured IPv6 prefixes in rtadvd.conf

Archimedes Gaviola wrote in <4f4aedbf.3000...@infoweapons.com>: ag> Now, my observation is that there seems to be a problem with ag> advertising two or perhaps more prefixes in the RA message. This has ag> been tested in 7.x and the issues were the same. FreeBSD 4.11 behave ag> the same as well

Re: [CFT] multiple FIB support in route(8)

"Alexander V. Chernikov" wrote in <4f2dc674.4070...@freebsd.org>: me> On 04.02.2012 18:35, Hiroki Sato wrote: me> > Hello, me> > me> > Can anyone review/test the attached patch to add "-fib number" option me> > to route(8)? This

  1   2   >