Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 18:12, Mark Martinec wrote: > Schrodinger wrote: > > What I am confused about is that without ACCEPT_RTADV on re0, FreeBSD > > doesn't perform Neighbour Solicitation for the default gateway but with > > ACCEPT_RTADV it does . Why ? This is Neig

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 17:27, Mark Martinec wrote: > > > I am informed that I must configure my interface to /64 by OVH. The same > > > as everyone else. So if everyone was on a /64 then we will send packets > > > to each other via our shared default gateway. > > Btw, if the router responds to your subnet'

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
their network. Thankfully this discussion has helped to further understand what *should* be happening and why RA is really more ideal. This is for a new box and I have time to experiment, my old host uses /56 but it's not the right way to do it, IMHO. C. > Schrodinger wrote: > > On 2013/0

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 16:59, Mark Martinec wrote: Hi Mark, [...] > > > Does adding the interface route not put the default gateway on-link > > though ? > > I don't think it does. The on-link state of an address comes > from matching the address to a set of prefixes on an interface, > or finding it in

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
presumably because it thinks that this is not on the same link as re0. C. > Schrodinger wrote: > > Damien, > > > > I appreciate your replies very much, but I'm a subscriber so just reply > > to the mailing list. Thanks. > > > > On 2013/03/13 14:19, F

Re: ntpd bind() failure: Can't assign requested address

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 14:38, Fleuriot Damien wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2013, at 11:44 PM, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > > > > > On 12 Mar 2013, at 22:42, "M. Schulte" wrote: > > > >> Hi! > >> > >> [First of all, I have posted this question already on the FreeBSD > >> forum -- so far without replies -- and n

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
Damien, I appreciate your replies very much, but I'm a subscriber so just reply to the mailing list. Thanks. On 2013/03/13 14:19, Fleuriot Damien wrote: [SNARF] > > > These are indeed correct, thanks for clarifying. > I thought that's what I said in my first email ;) Sorry for any confusio

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 14:02, Fleuriot Damien wrote: > > On Mar 13, 2013, at 1:52 PM, Schrodinger wrote: > > > On 2013/03/13 12:27, Mark Martinec wrote: > > > > Hi Mark, > > > >> On Wednesday March 13 2013 10:17:27 Schrodinger wrote: > >>> ifc

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 12:27, Mark Martinec wrote: Hi Mark, > On Wednesday March 13 2013 10:17:27 Schrodinger wrote: > > ifconfig_re0_ipv6="inet6 2001:41D0:2:E7c4::1 prefixlen 64" > > [...] > > Voodoo, indeed... I'm sure there's a /48 used somewhere but to be

Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-13 Thread Schrodinger
On 2013/03/13 02:25, Damien Fleuriot wrote: [...] > > > The network is actually /48 and you get assigned a /64 inside it. > > Set your interface to use the /48 prefix and voodoo will happen (I can assure > you with a 97% certainty that your default GW is inside the /48). > Of course, using th

ipv6 default router Operation not permitted

2013-03-12 Thread Schrodinger
Hi, I have a problem reaching my ipv6 default router. # ping6 -c 1 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2001:41d0:2:e7c4::1 --> 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ping6: sendmsg: Operation not permitted ping6: wrote 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 16 chars, ret=-1 --- 2001:41d0:2:e7ff:ff:f