Hello.
I have found to myself strange behaviour and difference between routing
to IPs on ngX, tunX interfaces. I will be very grateful if somebody
explain me why it is working in such way or give me a link to some good
manual about this.
I have 6.1-STABLE. Do preparations:
Create two interfaces, ng0 (by ngctl) and tun0 (by running interactive ppp).
Bring them down and then up with ifconfig.
Now they looks like:
ng0: flags=88d1<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,NOARP,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::211:2fff:fea9:7627%ng0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4
tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::211:2fff:fea9:7627%tun0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3
Opened by PID 11956
Questions:
1. If I look for the routing tables I see:
fe80::211:2fff:fea9:7627%ng0 fe80::211:2fff:fea9:7627%ng0 UHL ng0
fe80::211:2fff:fea9:7627%tun0 link#3 UHL lo0
So now I can ping ip on tun0, but can't on ng0. Why did they different
and what is right?
When I am trying "route get -inet6 other_onlink_ip" I see:
%route get -inet6 fe80::211:2fff:fea9:aaaa%tun0
interface: tun0
flags: <UP,DONE,CLONING>
%route get -inet6 fe80::211:2fff:fea9:aaaa%ng0
interface: ng0
flags: <UP,DONE>
They are something different even here.
2. Add IPv4 addresses to both link:
ng0: flags=88d1<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,NOARP,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 10.0.0.1 --> 10.0.0.2 netmask 0xffffffff
tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 10.0.1.1 --> 10.0.1.2 netmask 0xffffffff
Now I can ping neither 10.0.0.1 nor 10.0.1.1 because routing goes to my
default. Why if it is my local ips?
If I add routes to 10.0.0.1 and 10.0.1.1 via lo0, I can ping them. Why
now it works and is this right?
3. mpd ppp daemon on interface up event adds route for the local ip to
the lo0. Is it right way? And how in theory it must work for IPv6?
--
Alexander Motin
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
