any other ideas?
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Brian Henson wrote:
> yes it is checked and i have unchecked and rechecked it just for good
> measure.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Seth Mos wrote:
>
>> Op 3-4-2012 9:04, Brian Henson schreef:
>>
>> Another strange thing is when i try t
yes it is checked and i have unchecked and rechecked it just for good
measure.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Seth Mos wrote:
> Op 3-4-2012 9:04, Brian Henson schreef:
>
> Another strange thing is when i try to ping a host on the lan that i
>> have set a static ip i get this
>>
>> ping6: sendm
Op 3-4-2012 9:04, Brian Henson schreef:
Another strange thing is when i try to ping a host on the lan that i
have set a static ip i get this
ping6: sendmsg: Permission denied
ping6: wrote 2001:470:b:405::51 16 chars, ret=-1
The firewall rules might be out of date preventing other communication
Another strange thing is when i try to ping a host on the lan that i have
set a static ip i get this
ping6: sendmsg: Permission denied
ping6: wrote 2001:470:b:405::51 16 chars, ret=-1
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Brian Henson wrote:
> Oops 2.0 upgraded to 2.1 snapshot
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 20
Oops 2.0 upgraded to 2.1 snapshot
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:41 AM, Seth Mos wrote:
> Op 3-4-2012 8:33, Brian Henson schreef:
>
> Yes i have it set to managed. I pulled the branch down when i was on 2.0
>> RC3 and got it working. but this is a fresh install of 2.0 upgraded to
>> 2.0.1
>>
>
> Don'
Op 3-4-2012 8:33, Brian Henson schreef:
Yes i have it set to managed. I pulled the branch down when i was on 2.0
RC3 and got it working. but this is a fresh install of 2.0 upgraded to 2.0.1
Don't you mean 2.1? IPv6 support is only available there. In 2.0 the
global IPv6 disable flag would drop
Yes i have it set to managed. I pulled the branch down when i was on 2.0
RC3 and got it working. but this is a fresh install of 2.0 upgraded to 2.0.1
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Seth Mos wrote:
> Op 3-4-2012 8:20, Brian Henson schreef:
>
>> I have checked the /64 and the wan is on the wan an
Op 3-4-2012 8:20, Brian Henson schreef:
I have checked the /64 and the wan is on the wan and the Lan is setup
right. Files and info requested are below. I had this setup perfectly
before its just not wanting to work now.
Yeah, your config file and configuration check out. I wasn't aware that
t
I have checked the /64 and the wan is on the wan and the Lan is setup
right. Files and info requested are below. I had this setup perfectly
before its just not wanting to work now.
==Tunnel Info=
Server IPv4: Address:216.218.226.238
Server IPv6: Address:2001:470:*a*:405::1/64
Clien
Op 3 apr 2012, om 07:01 heeft Brian Henson het volgende geschreven:
> When I configure a Tunnelbroker tunnel i get the following in syslog
> radvd[46165]: sendmsg: Permission denied. The Wan works but the LAN doesn't
> even with manually assigned addresses. Anyone got any idea on this?
Are yo
When I configure a Tunnelbroker tunnel i get the following in syslog
radvd[46165]:
sendmsg: Permission denied. The Wan works but the LAN doesn't even with
manually assigned addresses. Anyone got any idea on this?
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.o
11 matches
Mail list logo
