[Bug 286260] NFS: sharing only for IPv6 subnet fails

ect, restarting mountd would have fixed the case where the IPv6 entry was the only one but reloading mountd would not have. I will come up with a patch for this bug. If you can reproduce the failed case, please try restarting mountd and let us know if that fixes the problem. -- You are receiving t

[Bug 286260] NFS: sharing only for IPv6 subnet fails

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286260 --- Comment #4 from Rick Macklem --- Ok, this is getting weird. Yesterday I reproduced the problem. To-day I did what I thought was exactly the same thing to reproduce the problem and.. it doesn't reproduce (ie the IPv6 export works

[Bug 286260] NFS: sharing only for IPv6 subnet fails

#3 from Rick Macklem --- Yep, I just reproduced it. I'll admit I always export to both IPv4 and IPv6, so I've never seen this before. (I suspect this has been broken for quite a while.) I will poke around and try to come up with a patch. (Note that the IPv6 mount does work once the expor

[Bug 286260] NFS: sharing only for IPv6 subnet fails

from Marek Zarychta --- How to reproduce? 1. Export the directory only for the IPv6 subnet, for example: /usr/amd64obj14stablev6only -network 2a02::xx00:100::/56 -mapall=root 2. Try to mount this directory from the client using IPv6. (It will respond: mount_nfs: nmount: /usr/obj: Stale NFS

[Bug 286322] IPv6 doesn't work across different FIBs (epair)

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286322 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 286279] route ipv6 errors on bootup in 15.0-CURRENT when world built without INET6 support

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286279 Yusuf Yaman changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |Closed Resolution|---

[Bug 286279] route ipv6 errors on bootup in 15.0-CURRENT when world built without INET6 support

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286279 Marek Zarychta changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zarych...@plan-b.pwste.edu.

[Bug 286279] route ipv6 errors on bootup in 15.0-CURRENT when world built without INET6 support

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286279 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 286260] NFS: sharing only for IPv6 subnet fails

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286260 Marek Zarychta changed: What|Removed |Added Version|14.2-STABLE |14.3-STABLE -- You are receiving

[Bug 286260] NFS: sharing only for IPv6 subnet fails

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286260 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rmack...@freebsd.org Assi

Re: FIBs with IPv6

bout the HE tunnel setup mentioned in the forum, and I think that is wrong. > >> On Apr 19, 2025, at 7:36 PM, Paige Thompson wrote: >> >> >> Hey yall, >> >> I came across a thread today on the forum regarding an issue with trying to >> get

Re: FIBs with IPv6

I forgot to mention the post I was referring to on the forums: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/fibs-with-ipv6.95984/ On Apr 19, 2025, at 7:36 PM, Paige Thompson wrote: Hey yall, I came across a thread today on the forum regarding an issue with trying to get IPv6 to work on something like a

Re: RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)]

On 4/9/25 13:10, Guido Falsi wrote: On 4/9/25 12:51, Ronald Klop wrote: Hi, Next to hostuuid you could add a jailname in the mix. That is what ether_gen_addr(9) does to make it easier to prevent collisions while copying jails around or run a jail on a readonly shared base filesystem. The R

Re: RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)]

On 4/9/25 12:51, Ronald Klop wrote: Hi, Next to hostuuid you could add a jailname in the mix. That is what ether_gen_addr(9) does to make it easier to prevent collisions while copying jails around or run a jail on a readonly shared base filesystem. The RFC is very clear on what should be us

Re: RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)]

: Marek Zarychta , FreeBSD Current , n...@freebsd.org Onderwerp: Re: RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)] On 4/6/25 23:38, Marek Zarychta wrote: > W dniu 6.04.2025 o 16:49, Gu

Re: RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)]

On 4/6/25 23:38, Marek Zarychta wrote: W dniu 6.04.2025 o 16:49, Guido Falsi pisze: Hi! I have recently implemented and tested the patch at [1], which implements RFC 7217, about generating IPv6 addresses that are constant through reboots, but do not expose the MAC address of the machine, not

Re: RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)]

W dniu 6.04.2025 o 16:49, Guido Falsi pisze: Hi! I have recently implemented and tested the patch at [1], which implements RFC 7217, about generating IPv6 addresses that are constant through reboots, but do not expose the MAC address of the machine, not being in any way derived by those

RFC: Implementation of RFC 7217 [A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers, with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)]

Hi! I have recently implemented and tested the patch at [1], which implements RFC 7217, about generating IPv6 addresses that are constant through reboots, but do not expose the MAC address of the machine, not being in any way derived by those. I'd like to get comments, testing and r

Re: RFC4941 IPv6 privacy knobs and how to set them

Chris Ross wrote: > Is there documentation about what these variables mean, and if “2” is > a useful value different than “1”? If so, how are they different? Hi, Chris. From: /usr/share/doc/IPv6/IMPLEMENTATION : | As documented in the source address selection document, temporary | add

Re: RFC4941 IPv6 privacy knobs and how to set them

n I could use the knob in rc.conf. I know I have some complaints about the privacy things being done with MAC address and IPv6 addresses, because I need my IPv6 addresses to be predictable for DNS. Trying to figure out how to get (1) [information] secure and (2) predictable/repeatable addresse

Re: RFC4941 IPv6 privacy knobs and how to set them

W dniu 31.03.2025 o 21:39, Chris Ross pisze: Hello all. Looking at some changes I made to configure my new gw router last year but failed to document and check in, I find in my sysctl.conf: + # Use and prefer the RFC 4941 temporary addresses + net.inet6.ip6.use_tempaddr: 2 + net.inet6.ip6.prefe

RFC4941 IPv6 privacy knobs and how to set them

Hello all. Looking at some changes I made to configure my new gw router last year but failed to document and check in, I find in my sysctl.conf: + # Use and prefer the RFC 4941 temporary addresses + net.inet6.ip6.use_tempaddr: 2 + net.inet6.ip6.prefer_tempaddr: 2 Looking across the interwebs, I

LOR TCP/IPv6 in6_selectsrc_socket

Hi, can someone look into this? lock order reversal: 1st 0xfe000932ca70 tcphash (tcphash, sleep mutex) @ /usr/src/sys/netinet/tcp_usrreq.c:1525 2nd 0x81cda800 in6_ifaddr_lock (in6_ifaddr_lock, rm) @ /usr/src/sys/netinet6/in6_src.c:301 lock order tcphash -> in6_ifaddr_lock attempt

Re: mpd5: tun0 always get IPv6 address via SLAAC although not configured

s the ISP as usual with a cloned pseudo device called "tun0" (in fact a renamed ng0 device). The ISP is changing both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses after a 24h period! Obtaining a ::/56 prefix and delegating the proper network prefixes to their NICs works with port net/dhcp6 and FreeBSD'

mpd5: tun0 always get IPv6 address via SLAAC although not configured

evice called "tun0" (in fact a renamed ng0 device). The ISP is changing both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses after a 24h period! Obtaining a ::/56 prefix and delegating the proper network prefixes to their NICs works with port net/dhcp6 and FreeBSD's board tool rtadvd(8). The setup i

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

: Kyle Evans AuthorDate: 2025-03-04 19:57:34 + Commit: Kyle Evans CommitDate: 2025-03-15 02:52:02 + kern: wg: remove overly-restrictive address family check IPv4 packets can be routed via an IPv6 nexthop, so the handling of the parsed address family is more strict

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284857 Kyle Evans changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|mfc-stable14? |mfc-stable14+ Resolution|---

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284857 Kyle Evans changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |In Progress -- You are receiving thi

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284857 Kyle Evans changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||mfc-stable14?, |

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

: Kyle Evans AuthorDate: 2025-03-04 19:57:34 + Commit: Kyle Evans CommitDate: 2025-03-04 19:57:34 + kern: wg: remove overly-restrictive address family check IPv4 packets can be routed via an IPv6 nexthop, so the handling of the parsed address family is more strict than it

[Bug 171840] [ip6] IPv6 packets transmitting only on queue 0

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171840 Zhenlei Huang changed: What|Removed |Added Status|Open|Closed CC|

[Bug 171840] [ip6] IPv6 packets transmitting only on queue 0

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171840 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org --- Comment #3 fro

mpd5: How to prevent tun0 getting multiple valid IPv6 addresses?

un0 (rtsol tun0 &) - restart dhcp6c (service dhcp6 restrt) - doing some logging - performing some DDNS adjustments with the appropriate provider mpd5 is configured to obtain IPv4 and IPv6 via ipcp, ipv6cp. While IPv4 has never been a problem, it seems that IPv6 is stuck with SLAAC (I never manage

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

. ||pl --- Comment #1 from Marek Zarychta --- Created attachment 258107 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=258107&action=edit 0001-wg-Unbreak-IPv4-routes-with-an-IPv6-next-hops.patch Tested in semi-production scenario: [hama

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284857 Kyle Evans changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://reviews.freebsd.org

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284857 Kyle Evans changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kev...@freebsd.org,

[Bug 245103] IPv6: update v6 temporary address lifetime according to rfc4941bis

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245103 lytbo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lytbo...@gmail.com --- Comment

[Bug 245103] IPv6: update v6 temporary address lifetime according to rfc4941bis

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245103 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #212757|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug 245103] IPv6: update v6 temporary address lifetime according to rfc4941bis

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245103 --- Comment #18 from Marek Zarychta --- I am still testing this solution on a bunch of workstations running 15-CURRENT or 14-STABLE. So far so good - no more stale addresses hanging for weeks on the interfaces. Perhaps it's worth implement

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

Am Fri, 21 Feb 2025 10:44:12 + Bob Bishop schrieb: > Hi, > > > On 21 Feb 2025, at 06:52, A FreeBSD User wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > Linux (especially OpenWRT we use) knows about a concept named "IPv6 > > tokenized interface > > iden

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

's the WAN interface you expect to get access over, yes that could be an issue and I'd rather you be on site in this instance. Save the pain! Good luck Roy That *_does_* appear to work; on boot from a power-cycle it properly got Ipv6 addresses and delegated them to the appropriate i

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 22:59:15 + Karl Denninger wrote --- > On 2/21/2025 14:18, Roy Marples wrote: > Aha! On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 18:34:25 + Roy Marples > wrote --- > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 17:49:28 + > Karl Denninger wrote --- > >

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

On 2/21/2025 14:18, Roy Marples wrote: Aha! On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 18:34:25 + Roy Marples wrote --- > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 17:49:28 + Karl Denninger wrote --- > > The issue that I had with it not configuring properly on a cold boot, as far as I know, has no

[Bug 210340] ipv6 alias, don't respond after a time

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210340 --- Comment #2 from wekers --- (In reply to Mark Linimon from comment #1) on 14.2-RELEASE-p2 still -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

Aha! On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 18:34:25 + Roy Marples wrote --- > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 17:49:28 + Karl Denninger > wrote --- > > The issue that I had with it not configuring properly on a > cold boot, as far as I know, has not been addressed -- unless there a

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 17:49:28 + Karl Denninger wrote --- > The issue that I had with it not configuring properly on a cold > boot, as far as I know, has not been addressed -- unless there are updates > since you and I conversed on that point. I was never able to repli

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

On 2/21/2025 12:47, Roy Marples wrote: On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 06:52:33 + A FreeBSD User wrote --- > Linux has this feature since a while and I can not believe that FreeBSD lacks such a feature. Work on merging dhcpcd into FreeBSD has sadly stalled for reasons unknown. https://revie

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 06:52:33 + A FreeBSD User wrote --- > Linux has this feature since a while and I can not believe that FreeBSD > lacks such a feature. Work on merging dhcpcd into FreeBSD has sadly stalled for reasons unknown. https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22012 Maybe some Free

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

Hi On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 13:31:53 + Eugene Pereviazko wrote --- > 21.02.25 08:52, A FreeBSD User пише: > > Hello, > > > > Linux (especially OpenWRT we use) knows about a concept named "IPv6 > > tokenized interface > > identifier". T

Re: rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

21.02.25 08:52, A FreeBSD User пише: Hello, Linux (especially OpenWRT we use) knows about a concept named "IPv6 tokenized interface identifier". The concept is self explanatory, a interface/router obtains a propagated prefix and the concept allows the explicit definition of the ho

[Bug 210340] ipv6 alias, don't respond after a time

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210340 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugmeis...@freebsd.org --- Comment

rtadvd(8) How to IPv6 tokenize interface identifier

Hello, Linux (especially OpenWRT we use) knows about a concept named "IPv6 tokenized interface identifier". The concept is self explanatory, a interface/router obtains a propagated prefix and the concept allows the explicit definition of the host portion. I haven't managed to ac

[Bug 284857] wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284857 Bug ID: 284857 Summary: wg(4): IPv4 packet with IPv6 nexthop not forwarded Product: Base System Version: 15.0-CURRENT Hardware: Any OS: Any Status: New

[Bug 284459] if_ovpn: Undefined symbol "in6_sin6_2_sin_in_sock" if IPv6 support is disabled

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284459 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|n...@freebsd.org |k...@freebsd.org Stat

[Bug 284459] if_ovpn: Undefined symbol "in6_sin6_2_sin_in_sock" if IPv6 support is disabled

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284459 --- Comment #1 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit in branch main references this bug: URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=a55197c3228cd015ebc8218afbc938ef09191a98 commit a55197c3228cd015ebc8218afbc938ef09191a98 Author:

[Bug 284459] if_ovpn: Undefined symbol "in6_sin6_2_sin_in_sock" if IPv6 support is disabled

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=284459 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 246748] reply_from_interface and reply_src sysctl for IPv6

|reply_from_interface and|reply_src sysctl for IPv6 |reply_src sysctl for IPv6 | --- Comment #8 from Mark Linimon --- (In reply to Neel Chauhan from comment #4) Note that as of 20250124, this is still in "needs revision". -- You are receiving this ma

[Bug 208173] can't create GRE-tunnel over IPv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208173 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|n...@freebsd.org |bugmeis...@freebsd.org

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG9234a50752cd: ng_ksocket: add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing (authored by p.mousavizadeh_prot

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

glebius added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS > p.mousavizadeh_protonmail.com wrote in ng_ksocket.c:62 > I am using `ifunit()` at line 352, and its function declared in > . Maybe I think it's required due to my lack of knowledge, > Should I remove it? Sorry, I though it belongs to net/if.h R

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

p.mousavizadeh_protonmail.com added a comment. @glebius: Also, Here is my github repo as you requested. spmzt/freebsd-src/tree/ksocket_ipv6: D48204 INLINE COMMENTS > glebius wrote in ng_ksocket.c:62 > What does require if_var.h? I a

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

+32,7 @@ .\" .\" Author: Archie Cobbs .\" -.Dd January 9, 2012 +.Dd January 9, 2025 .Dt NG_KSOCKET 4 .Os .Sh NAME @@ -183,7 +183,8 @@ equivalent of the C structure is an acceptable form. For the -.Dv PF_INET +.Dv PF_INET , +.Dv PF_INET6 and .Dv PF_LOCAL address families,

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

glebius added a comment. Also, any meaningful change to a manual page requires bumping the .Dd value at the beginning of the page to today's date. REPOSITORY rG FreeBSD src repository CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48204/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.fre

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

glebius added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS > ng_ksocket.c:62 > +#include > +#include > + What does require if_var.h? REPOSITORY rG FreeBSD src repository CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48204/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48204 EMAIL PRE

[Bug 283699] Kernel OOB read due to bypass of IPv6 Hop-by-hop header check using fragmentation

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283699 Philip Paeps changed: What|Removed |Added Group|freebsd_committer | Severity|Affects Only Me

[Bug 263986] IPv6 address gets detached when using multiple IPv6 routers

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263986 --- Comment #10 from Delta Regeer --- (In reply to Delta Regeer from comment #9) Apologies for the additional email noise, I wanted to make sure to add that I am on FreeBSD 14.2-RELEASE. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are th

[Bug 263986] IPv6 address gets detached when using multiple IPv6 routers

IPv6 only VLAN and configuration is done with ULA addressing, that is advertised with a router lifetime of 0. Unfortunately that means that when vlan1001 accepted the router advertisement it never installs the on-link route for the prefix it received, even though we expressly want to force that /64

[Differential] D48204: Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket.

. REVISION SUMMARY Add IPv6 support for address parsing and unparsing in ng_ksocket. - Fix issues related to D23788 <https://reviews.freebsd.org/D23788>. - Validate square brackets as a requirement. (src, man) Co-authored by: Neel Chauhan Note: Phabricator won't let

[Bug 195197] [netinet6] ipv6 prefix not renewed when managed by userspace daemon with pltime and vltime

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195197 Alexander Vereeken changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|patch | -- You are receiving this m

[Bug 283116] ntpd doesn't sync with any NTP servers on IPv6-Only host

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283116 Cy Schubert changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|n...@freebsd.org |c...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 283116] ntpd doesn't sync with any NTP servers on IPv6-Only host

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283116 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |Open CC|

[Bug 283116] ntpd doesn't sync with any NTP servers on IPv6-Only host

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283116 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282535 Andrey V. Elsukov changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|In Pr

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

: Andrey V. Elsukov AuthorDate: 2024-11-25 17:42:00 + Commit: Andrey V. Elsukov CommitDate: 2024-12-02 10:24:03 + ipsec: fix IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling. Properly initialize setdf variable in ipsec_encap(). It is used for AF_INET6 case when IPv6 datagram is going to be

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282535 Alexander Ziaee changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |In Progress -- You are receivin

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

: Andrey V. Elsukov AuthorDate: 2024-11-25 17:42:00 + Commit: Andrey V. Elsukov CommitDate: 2024-11-25 17:42:00 + ipsec: fix IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling. Properly initialize setdf variable in ipsec_encap(). It is used for AF_INET6 case when IPv6 datagram is going to be

[Bug 265089] Connection errors with IPv6 source address validation

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265089 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|New

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282535 Andrey V. Elsukov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a...@freebsd.org --- Comment #

[Bug 263982] IPv6 Router Advertisement - Route Information Option

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263982 --- Comment #5 from David T --- UPDATE: a few things to look out for I just learned that NetworkManager ignores lifetime value in RA messages. What it also ignores is the RIO with zero prefix length, which is in violation of RFC 4191. Push

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282535 --- Comment #2 from Alexander Ziaee --- Yes, thought you might find it interesting; sorry for the disruption. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282535 --- Comment #1 from Lexi Winter --- Alexander: did you mean to cc me on this? i have never touched this code and know nothing about it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 282535] if_ipsec mtu seems to be 1422 for ipv6

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282535 Alexander Ziaee changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are rec

[Bug 263982] IPv6 Router Advertisement - Route Information Option

David T --- So I wrote this: https://github.com/dxdxdt/gists/blob/master/writeups/ipv6/rfc4191/rfc4191.md RIO is a quite recent invention in Apple products as well. Neat thing to have, if you ask me. Hopefully, I'll get to update the table soon. I find it so funny how pfSense is using RIO to

[Bug 261129] IPv6 default route vanishes with rtadvd/rtsold

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=261129 Patrick M. Hausen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@hausen.com --- Comment #2

[Bug 261129] IPv6 default route vanishes with rtadvd/rtsold

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=261129 --- Comment #19 from Tatsuki Makino --- If something like the one shown below was about to be built, /etc/rc.conf needed to define a value like: ipv6_cpe_wanif="em0" Also, it is mandatory to send RA from the bridge interface. If it is sent

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 --- Comment #8 from Franco Fichtner --- ISP server implementations appear to differ subtly even inside the protocol. We can get a couple of reports per year about new weirdness during lease acquire or renew. Personally, I've never had persi

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 k...@denninger.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||k...@denninger.net --- Comment

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 Franco Fichtner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fra...@opnsense.org --- Comment

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 --- Comment #5 from Curtis Villamizar --- (In reply to Zhenlei Huang from comment #4) The problem did not go away if using dhcp6c, I just gave up on using dhcp6c. I'm using dhcpcd with 14.1-STABLE built on 20240809 (uname -K == 1401502, un

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 --- Comment #4 from Zhenlei Huang --- (In reply to Curtis Villamizar from comment #3) > This can be closed as no longer reproducable (for now). May you please share on which version this issue is no longer reproducible ? > I am no longer u

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 --- Comment #3 from Curtis Villamizar --- This can be closed as no longer reproducable (for now). I am no longer using dhcp6c, using dhcpcd instead. I'm not seeing this problem with dhcpcd. -- You are receiving this mail because: You ar

[Bug 281391] IPv6 multicast sent to wrong MAC address

with a comment. Here's some of my truss output with concurrent runs on 13.4 and 14.1 the 14.1 machine... (command "hive foo" i.e. one argument to cause ipv6 case...) NOTE this receives the multicast messages... socket(PF_INET6,SOCK_DGRAM,0)= 3 (0x3) bind(3,{ A

[Bug 281391] IPv6 multicast sent to wrong MAC address

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=281391 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ma...@freebsd.org Stat

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

d. There >> seemed to be some sort of link flap on my local interfaces a couple >> of times the morning of Sept 17, and after that IPv6 wasn’t working. >> The next-hop and router seems to be unreachable now. > Are you using pf? FreeBSD-EN-24:16.pf I am. Thank you. Looking at

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

clearly not paying attention. At the time I stopped seeing the aforementioned problem, a new one started. There seemed to be some sort of link flap on my local interfaces a couple of times the morning of Sept 17, and after that IPv6 wasn’t working. The next-hop and router seems to be unreachable

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

s, I was clearly not paying attention. At the time I stopped seeing the aforementioned problem, a new one started. There seemed to be some sort of link flap on my local interfaces a couple of times the morning of Sept 17, and after that IPv6 wasn’t working. The next-hop and router seems to be u

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

> On Sep 16, 2024, at 18:02, Chris Ross wrote: > > Build was from releng/14.1 back at the start of August. Looking > now, I see that I’m behind by 24 commits, so maybe should try > updating. Hmm. Well, I updated my releng/14.1 tree and built a new kernel last night. I rebooted and after dhc

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

ilt after the recent > zfs patch set hit) on stable/14 and it is not seeing that -- but it is not a > router, it is an end-node running rtsold and gets its IPv6 address via SLACC > from the router. I also tried to reproduce this on a couple of non-router machines and was not able to. - Chris

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

ere so I do. I have a non-routing machine that is very current (rebuilt after the recent zfs patch set hit) on stable/14 and it is not seeing that -- but it is not a router, it is an end-node running rtsold and gets its IPv6 address via SLACC from the router. On 9/16/2024 17:45, Chris Ross wrot

Re: IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

With Roy’s help, I > have IPv6 working as expected, but I am seeing something that I suspect > is unusual. Roy doesn’t think it’s specific to dhcpcd, as it is caused > by routing changes that dhcpcd is merely reacting to. > > While dhcpcd is running, it repeatedly logs the followi

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >