On 7 June 2011 17:12, Nick Andrew wrote:
> There's no ICMP6 in that list, which is why your ping responses were
> blocked.
>
ufw allows ICMP (4 and 6) by default. The problem was that the Linode
kernel (Xen kernels with no module support) didn't have IPv6 connection
tracking compiled in. Updat
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 12:47:05PM +1000, Simon Rumble wrote:
> To Action From
> -- --
> 22/tcp (OpenSSH) ALLOW INAnywhere
> 25/tcp (SMTP) ALLOW INAnywhere
> 80/tcp (WWW) ALLOW INAnyw
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:56 PM, miloska wrote:
> You need a rule to allow packages for existing connections in -
> something like this:
>
> $IPT6 -A INPUT -i $PUB_IF -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
>
> I'm not sure if you need any special setup to tell to the kernel that
> connecti
On 7 June 2011 12:47, Simon Rumble wrote:
> On 7 June 2011 12:39, Nick Andrew wrote:
>
>> I guess it just means the firewall is blocking incoming ipv6 traffic.
>> The firewall allowed your outbound packet through, but not the inbound
>> response.
>>
>
> Yeah that's right. But not how it should w
On 7 June 2011 12:39, Nick Andrew wrote:
> I guess it just means the firewall is blocking incoming ipv6 traffic.
> The firewall allowed your outbound packet through, but not the inbound
> response.
>
Yeah that's right. But not how it should work, according to what I've been
reading.
Here's the
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 12:03:50PM +1000, Simon Rumble wrote:
> Jun 7 11:56:23 stout kernel: [UFW AUDIT INVALID] IN=eth0 OUT=
> MAC=f2:3c:91:96:7e:df:c8:4c:75:f5:c4:ff:86:dd
> SRC=2001:4860:4002:0802::::1012
> DST=2600:3c00:::f03c:91ff:fe96:7edf LEN=104 TC=0 HOPLIMIT=55
> FLOWL
At Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:01:10 +1030,
Glen Turner wrote:
>
> On 22/03/10 13:08, Peter Chubb wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone added scripts to dhcpd.conf to control DDNS records based
> > on MAC address?
>
> See ddns-hostname in dhcpd.conf(5). You can set it to an expression,
> see dhcp-eval(5). The
On 22/03/10 13:38, Peter Chubb wrote:
> Has anyone added scripts to dhcpd.conf to control DDNS records based
> on MAC address?
>
> It's such an obvious idea, that someone must have done it!
Haven't done that, but just FYI, Windows 7 (and possibly Vista, but
haven't tested) does client-side (
On 22/03/10 13:08, Peter Chubb wrote:
Has anyone added scripts to dhcpd.conf to control DDNS records based
on MAC address?
See ddns-hostname in dhcpd.conf(5). You can set it to an expression,
see dhcp-eval(5). The vector "hardware" contains the MAC address.
Note that you can log an expre
Robert Barnett writes:
> Just for fun, I'm setting up a FC10 machine with as an IPv6 router.
> The tunnel device (tun0) is automatically created using a script (aiccu)
> I want to allow other machines to use this box as a gateway, but I think I
> have the config wrong
...you didn't tell us why:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 10:55:27PM +1100, Robert Barnett wrote:
>
> Just for fun, I'm setting up a FC10 machine with as an IPv6 router.
> The tunnel device (tun0) is automatically created using a script (aiccu)
is this a 6to4 sit or are you using a tunnel broker ?
You can use ip -6 r g ipv6.goog
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 02:02:47PM +1000, Christopher Vance wrote:
> On 10/23/07, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I will want to set this on an openwrt box, do you see any problems ?
>
> My gateway runs a different free OS, so I can't give explicit
> step-by-steps, but I would expect Lin
On 10/23/07, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will want to set this on an openwrt box, do you see any problems ?
My gateway runs a different free OS, so I can't give explicit
step-by-steps, but I would expect Linux on your openwrt to be more
than adequate.
The ifconfig manual on my Linux
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 10:38:28AM +1000, Christopher Vance wrote:
> On 10/23/07, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any one know what has happened to ipv6.broadway.aarnet.net.au
> > (::192.231.212.5)
> > , I used to use it as a 6to4 gateway. But it doesn't seem to be working any
> > more.
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 10:26 +1000, Alex Samad wrote:
> Hi
>
> Any one know what has happened to ipv6.broadway.aarnet.net.au
> (::192.231.212.5)
> , I used to use it as a 6to4 gateway. But it doesn't seem to be working any
> more.
I'll find out.
--
Glen Turner
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User'
On 10/23/07, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any one know what has happened to ipv6.broadway.aarnet.net.au
> (::192.231.212.5)
> , I used to use it as a 6to4 gateway. But it doesn't seem to be working any
> more.
I have an explicit tunnel (2001::/16), rather than 6to4 (2002::/16),
with b
The line in your response from nslookup,
;; reply from unexpected source: 192.168.1.1#3073, expected 192.168.1.1#53
definitely looks like the culprit. DNS responses should source from UDP port
53. I'm sure with the the Linux resolver normally blocks a response not from
port 53. It could be that
Solved the problem. Found the addresses of my ISPs DNSs and programmed
them in. Much faster!!!
Thanks for the assistance, it is really appreciated. I should have
thought of this but I was blinded by my confidence in the new ADSL
router/modem.
Thanks again
Ashley
tuxta2 wrote:
Dean Hamstead
wrote:
Hi Dean,
Actually what I am getting is very long lookup times but the transfer
rate,
on downloads, is just fine.
Ashley
-- Original Message --
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:46:43 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [SLUG] IPV6
From: "Dean Hamstead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ashl
Dean Hamstead wrote:
cat your resolv.conf (cat /etc/resolv.conf)
then test each server by hand
ie
nslookup google.com 256.256.256.256
where the obviously wrong ip address is the nslookup server
are you using a billion router? i found that its internal name
server was 100% happy with windows
didnt like
unix clients.
Dean
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Dean,
Actually what I am getting is very long lookup times but the transfer rate,
on downloads, is just fine.
Ashley
-- Original Message --
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:46:43 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [SLUG] IPV6
From: "Dean Hamstead&quo
Hi Dean,
Actually what I am getting is very long lookup times but the transfer rate,
on downloads, is just fine.
Ashley
>-- Original Message --
>Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:46:43 +1100 (EST)
>Subject: Re: [SLUG] IPV6
>From: "Dean Hamstead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: &
local dns problems will manifest themselves as failed look ups, long look
up times then normal transfer rates.
if domain names are resolving properly they will be resolving to ipv4
addresses and the stack will use the right protocol.
check your network cable, switch/hub port and look at /var/log/
On 08/10/2006, at 06:25 , Howard Lowndes wrote:
I seem to recall reading somewhere that some major US agencies - I
think one was DoD - are mandating that their systems change over
in 2008, so I think the urgency might be nearer than you predict.
Well, there was also a mandate to switch fro
$quoted_author = "Howard Lowndes" ;
>
> I seem to recall reading somewhere that some major US agencies - I think
> one was DoD - are mandating that their systems change over in 2008, so
> I think the urgency might be nearer than you predict.
i think you will find that they are mandating _suppo
Also for a positive slant on where Australia might be headed for with IPv6 there appears be even a summit - http://www.isoc-au.org.au/ipv6summit/ Papers from last years summit are available here
http://www.isoc-au.org.au/ipv6summit05/abstracts.html
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing Lis
There are some really good thoughts here.As Christopher rightly points out IPv6 has built-in a lot of the features that have been "hacks" we have added on to IPv41. Lots of address space to waste - NAT not required.
2. Built in security (IPSEC) and Quality of Service at the IP level.3. Mobility so
Please be aware! This e-mail is liberally mixed with my personal opinion as
well as technical fact, so read with that in mind. If you will be annoyed or
offended by a little (or perhaps a lot) of ranting I suggest you skip this
mail. Want my opinion of the modern ISP, read on...
> I did a quick Go
Hi Martin,
> While in some respect, I share your sentiments (in wanting to get
> people to think about the move to IPv6) I still think you are way too
> early. I have been doing network designs and consulting for a the
> very biggest corporate and government bodies for the last 18 years or
> so. I
Howard,While in some respect, I share your sentiments (in wanting to get people to think about the move to IPv6) I still think you are way too early. I have been doing network designs and consulting for a the very biggest corporate and government bodies for the last 18 years or so. I have been watc
Anand Kumria wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:30:43PM +1100, Visser, Martin wrote:
Anand Kumria wrote :-
The site-local prefix (fe80) has been deprecated (rfc3879), instead you
want IPv6 local addresses (rfc4193) which you
can self-generate with tools such as:
http://www.hznet.de/too
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:30:43PM +1100, Visser, Martin wrote:
> Anand Kumria wrote :-
>
> >The site-local prefix (fe80) has been deprecated (rfc3879), instead you
> want IPv6 local addresses (rfc4193) which you
> >can self-generate with tools such as:
> >
> http://www.hznet.de/tools/generate-uni
Anand Kumria wrote :-
>The site-local prefix (fe80) has been deprecated (rfc3879), instead you
want IPv6 local addresses (rfc4193) which you
>can self-generate with tools such as:
>
http://www.hznet.de/tools/generate-uniq-local-ipv6-unicast-addr.sh
Hmm, I dropped off the IETF announce lists a
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:08:14PM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 09:12:26AM +1100, Alexander Samad wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 01:00:32AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:37:09PM +1100, Alexander Samad wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I also have 2 in
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 09:12:26AM +1100, Alexander Samad wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 01:00:32AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:37:09PM +1100, Alexander Samad wrote:
> > >
> > > I also have 2 internet connections (1 static and 1 dynamic), I onyl use
> > > the ip6t
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 01:00:32AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:37:09PM +1100, Alexander Samad wrote:
> >
> > I also have 2 internet connections (1 static and 1 dynamic), I onyl use
> > the ip6to4 addressing
> > schema, which is a pain for the dhcp internet address cau
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:37:09PM +1100, Alexander Samad wrote:
>
> I also have 2 internet connections (1 static and 1 dynamic), I onyl use the
> ip6to4 addressing
> schema, which is a pain for the dhcp internet address cause I have to
> make changes to my internet dns, if memory serves me corr
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 02:03:29PM +1100, Dean Hamstead wrote:
> im not sure if this is a chat topic or not
nah
>
> but anyway, is anyone here using ipv6?
yes, in fact progsoc -- where slug.org.au is hosted -- is also using
IP6. While you can ping6 the slug box on 2001:388:c152:7::4 alas the
w
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 04:25:15PM +1100, Dean Hamstead wrote:
> how do applications seem to react?
>
> most programs seem very 'ipv4' hardcoded. especially in windows,
> but in general to programs seem to accept ip6 addresses?
I just use names and let dns handle it, if its a ipv6 aware app, then
how do applications seem to react?
most programs seem very 'ipv4' hardcoded. especially in windows,
but in general to programs seem to accept ip6 addresses?
Dean
Alexander Samad wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 02:03:29PM +1100, Dean Hamstead wrote:
im not sure if this is a chat topic or not
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 02:03:29PM +1100, Dean Hamstead wrote:
> im not sure if this is a chat topic or not
>
> but anyway, is anyone here using ipv6? im thinking of
> using it here at home for curiosities sake. im running
> debian and freebsd so they are ready. macosx and xp
> (for the parents an
what have you done in terms of ip addressing?
Dean
Peter Chubb wrote:
"Dean" == Dean Hamstead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dean> im not sure if this is a chat topic or not but anyway, is anyone
Dean> here using ipv6? im thinking of using it here at home for
Dean> curiosities sake. im running
> "Dean" == Dean Hamstead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dean> im not sure if this is a chat topic or not but anyway, is anyone
Dean> here using ipv6? im thinking of using it here at home for
Dean> curiosities sake. im running debian and freebsd so they are
Dean> ready. macosx and xp (for the par
43 matches
Mail list logo
