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
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'
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
11 matches
Mail list logo