[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

IPv6 neighbor flaps for ISP router are occurring frequently

Hello. Following the earlier thread "DHCPv6 IA_PD - how-to” I have been bringing up a new gateway router for my network. 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 ro

[Bug 281391] IPv6 multicast sent to wrong MAC address

--- Comment #1 from anto...@hesiod.org --- I have a test program which shows 13.3 multicast reaching 14.1 but the 14.1 packets do not reach 13.3 The program tests ipv4 or ipv6. It was working fine when written for 13.1 years ago. So, anyhow, I think I've hit this problem. -- You are receiving this

[Bug 281391] IPv6 multicast sent to wrong MAC address

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=281391 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 233683] IPv6 ND neighbor solicitation messages fail to arrive

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233683 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|In Progre

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

|--- |Not A Bug --- Comment #7 from Marek Zarychta --- I was wrong in comment #6 connecting two bugs, and since, presumably, what was reported here wasn't a bug, but the issue with IPv6 fragmented packets, perhaps it's the right time to close this PR. -- You are rece

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276838 Marek Zarychta changed: What|Removed |Added See Also|https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu | |gzilla/show_b

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276838 Marek Zarychta changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu

[Bug 233683] IPv6 ND neighbor solicitation messages fail to arrive

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233683 --- Comment #24 from Kristof Provost --- (In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #23) Not as far as I know. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 233683] IPv6 ND neighbor solicitation messages fail to arrive

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233683 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |In Progress CC|

[Bug 280736] Packet size of EtherIP over IPv6 is limited to 1280 bytes.

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=280736 Andrey V. Elsukov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a...@freebsd.org --- Comment #

[Bug 280736] Packet size of EtherIP over IPv6 is limited to 1280 bytes.

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=280736 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

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

|| --- Comment #17 from Marek Zarychta --- Created attachment 252676 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=252676&action=edit Implement-the-upcoming-RFC4941bis-IPv6-SLAAC(Patch by Fernando Gont) So far works fine on a few workstations. I am updating th

IPv6 interface identifier/index on FreeBSD?

So, moving to a dynamic IPv6 network, I want to be able to address my hosts both predictably (for which eui64/RA has been working), and also statically in some cases. For a dynamic network/subnet, an IPv6 address can be specified by the “subnet prefix” and "interface identifier” (or “inte

[Bug 263288] IPv6 system not responding to Neighbor Solicitation

router2 then router2 sends back a NS and freebsd host never replies. I have not checked the code but https://www.freebsd.org/security/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-08:10.nd6.asc says "The solution described below causes IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Neighbor Solicitation messages from non-neighbors to be ig

[Bug 271366] Invoking IPv6 network device address event may sleep with the following non-sleepable locks held

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=271366 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ma...@freebsd.org Resoluti

[Bug 280132] EHOSTUNREACH when using IPv4 over IPv6 nexthop

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=280132 Zhenlei Huang changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|n...@freebsd.org |z...@freebsd.org Severi

[Bug 280132] EHOSTUNREACH when using IPv4 over IPv6 nexthop

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=280132 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

tap not (re-)adding IPv6 link-local anymore?

Hi, using tap with bhyve when I reboot an instance but the tap8 does not get destroyed but re-used it loses it's IPv6 link-local address and as bhyve starts again (remote end comes up) it doesn't come back. I have to manually toggle tap8 down, tap8 up to get the IPv6 link-locla back

[Bug 263288] IPv6 system not responding to Neighbor Solicitation

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263288 --- Comment #21 from Robert Blayzor --- I have run into this issue now a few times. I have seen hosts try to ping my IPv6 hosts from off network and they just hang. Upon investigation I have found that the host is hung up on ignoring NS

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

n unpatched stable/14 either. So the regression was not introduced by Fernando's patch. The ndp timers look strange indeed, starting at 1 day in a few seconds they decrease to seconds, then expire and after renewal, the story repeats. FreeBSD stable/14 with static IPv6 address, without Fernando

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

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245103 --- Comment #15 from Kurt Jaeger --- (In reply to Marek Zarychta from comment #14) man ifconfig says: -L Display address lifetime for IPv6 addresses as time offset string. but it does not change the output from ifconfig

[Bug 265857] qlnxe: no IPV6 pings between nodes on the same switch until an IPv4 address is set

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=265857 --- Comment #32 from Zhenlei Huang --- @benoitic , may you please give it a try with the patch mentioned in https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=278087 ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bu

[Bug 271366] Invoking IPv6 network device address event may sleep with the following non-sleepable locks held

from Ricardo Branco --- Same here on QEMU VM: Invoking IPv6 network device address event may sleep with the following non-sleepable locks held: exclusive sleep mutex vtnet0-rx0 (vtnet0-rx0) r = 0 (0xf80002988600) locked @ /usr/src/sys/dev/virtio/network/if_vtnet.c:2212 stack backtrace: #0

IPv6 neighbour solicitations being sent from wrong address?

ype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 86: 2001:ba8:4015:1::1 > 2001:ba8:4015:::1: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:ba8:4015:::1, length 32 11:03:14.417986 02:0c:2a:51:7a:0a > 02:0c:2a:51:7a:0b, ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd), length 86: 2001:ba8:4015:1::1 > 2001:ba8:4015:::1: ICM

[Bug 263982] IPv6 Router Advertisement - Route Information Option

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263982 --- Comment #3 from Alex Wied --- Is there any plan to fix this? It's strange to me that a pfSense router (which runs FreeBSD) would cause issues for a FreeBSD machine. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

> On Mar 22, 2024, at 5:05 PM, Benoit Chesneau > wrote: > > Awesome! Do we have a chance it land in a patch release soon ? Or better to > use a STABLE until the 14.1 is released? > Or you can stay on 14.0 If the workaround can fulfill. 14.1 is about to be released at 18 June as per the sch

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

Awesome! Do we have a chance it land in a patch release soon ? Or better to use a STABLE until the 14.1 is released? Benoît On Thursday, March 14th, 2024 at 10:56, Zhenlei Huang wrote: >> On Mar 14, 2024, at 9:04 AM, Zhenlei Huang wrote: >> >>> On Mar 14, 2024, at 3:07 AM, Marek Zarychta >>>

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

: Kristof Provost AuthorDate: 2024-03-21 07:38:45 + Commit: Kristof Provost CommitDate: 2024-03-22 08:00:05 + if_ovpn tests: test large packets in IPv6 tunnel There's a report of MTU issues over IPv6 DCO tunnels. Extend the 4in6 test to send a series of pings

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276838 --- Comment #4 from Marek Zarychta --- In my case, the limits for the successful "ping -4 -s $size remote_IP" are: - in IPv6 tunnel, $size is limited to 1400 - in IPv4 tunnel $size limit is 1412 It was tested between FreeBSD

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276838 --- Comment #3 from Kristof Provost --- I am unable to reproduce any such issue testing locally. Over an IPv6 tunnel I manage to transmit arbitrary sized ping requests, and I also see no issues transmitting a large (1MB) file. Patch for

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

> On Mar 14, 2024, at 9:04 AM, Zhenlei Huang wrote: > > > >> On Mar 14, 2024, at 3:07 AM, Marek Zarychta > > wrote: >> >> W dniu 13.03.2024 o 18:59, Marek Zarychta pisze: >>> W dniu 13.03.2024 o 16:31, Benoit Chesneau pisze: Hrm I thought it was imp

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

> On Mar 14, 2024, at 3:07 AM, Marek Zarychta > wrote: > > W dniu 13.03.2024 o 18:59, Marek Zarychta pisze: >> W dniu 13.03.2024 o 16:31, Benoit Chesneau pisze: >>> Hrm I thought it was implemented via >>> https://reviews.freebsd.org/rG62e1a437f3285e785d9b35a476d36a469a90028d >>> >>> Wasn't

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

Thanks for the patch! I will try :) Benoît Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Wednesday, March 13th, 2024 at 20:07, Marek Zarychta wrote: > W dniu 13.03.2024 o 18:59, Marek Zarychta pisze: > > > W dniu 13.03.2024 o 16:31, Benoit Chesneau pisze: > > > > > Hrm I thought it was implemente

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

W dniu 13.03.2024 o 18:59, Marek Zarychta pisze: W dniu 13.03.2024 o 16:31, Benoit Chesneau pisze: Hrm I thought it was implemented via https://reviews.freebsd.org/rG62e1a437f3285e785d9b35a476d36a469a90028d Wasn't it merged ? (also pretty sure I did test it in freebsd 13). FWIW: it works fin

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

W dniu 13.03.2024 o 16:31, Benoit Chesneau pisze: Hrm I thought it was implemented via https://reviews.freebsd.org/rG62e1a437f3285e785d9b35a476d36a469a90028d Wasn't it merged ? (also pretty sure I did test it in freebsd 13). FWIW: it works fine on CURRENT # ifconfig vlan8 destroy # ifconfig

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

W dniu 13.03.2024 o 16:31, Benoit Chesneau pisze: Hrm I thought it was implemented viahttps://reviews.freebsd.org/rG62e1a437f3285e785d9b35a476d36a469a90028d Wasn't it merged ? (also pretty sure I did test it in freebsd 13). You are right, I am sorry for contesting this. It looks like it hasn'

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

ei Huang pisze: > > > I managed to repeat this bug. > > > It's more like missing feature, not any bug. AFAIK it was never > implemented in route(8) to set IPv6 address as a next hop for IPv4 > network. It should be possible to do it with Linux iproute2 package &

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

W dniu 13.03.2024 o 14:09, Zhenlei Huang pisze: I managed to repeat this bug. It's more like missing feature, not any bug. AFAIK it was never implemented in route(8) to set IPv6 address as a next hop for IPv4 network. It should be possible to do it with Linux iproute2 package under

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

o the interface. Benoît On Wednesday, March 13th, 2024 at 14:09, Zhenlei Huang wrote: >> On Mar 13, 2024, at 12:19 PM, Zhenlei Huang wrote: >> >>> On Mar 13, 2024, at 4:36 AM, Benoit Chesneau >>> wrote: >>> >>> On latest freebsd 14.0 release ,

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

multimedia.eu>> wrote: >>> >>> On latest freebsd 14.0 release , I am trying to join an ipv4 address over >>> an IPV6 local link using the following command : >>> >>> `route add -net 10.200.1.1/32 -inet6 fe80::9439:36ff:fef0:7cbd%vlan200` &g

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

> On Mar 13, 2024, at 12:19 PM, Zhenlei Huang wrote: > > > >> On Mar 13, 2024, at 4:36 AM, Benoit Chesneau > <mailto:beno...@enki-multimedia.eu>> wrote: >> >> On latest freebsd 14.0 release , I am trying to join an ipv4 address over an >

Re: ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

> On Mar 13, 2024, at 4:36 AM, Benoit Chesneau > wrote: > > On latest freebsd 14.0 release , I am trying to join an ipv4 address over an > IPV6 local link using the following command : > > `route add -net 10.200.1.1/32 -inet6 fe80::9439:36ff:fef0:7cbd%vlan200` > &g

ipv4 route with ipv6 local link nexthop ?

On latest freebsd 14.0 release , I am trying to join an ipv4 address over an IPV6 local link using the following command : `route add -net 10.200.1.1/32 -inet6 fe80::9439:36ff:fef0:7cbd%vlan200` But I get the following error: ``` route add -net 10.200.1.1/32 -inet6 fe80::9439:36ff:fef0:7cbd

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

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=261129 FiLiS changed: What|Removed |Added CC||freebsdb...@filis.org --- Comment #18 from

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

since the test machine needs it copy the boot/kernel and boot/modules to the test machine reboot the test machine check for signs the test passed (IPv6 addrs configured by dhcp6c) Rinse and repeat with git bisect. I have some simple shell scripts (that use ssh from another machine) that automates

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 Mark Johnston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |Open CC|

[Bug 276838] ovpn(4) - problems with large TCP segments over IPv6 tunnel when DCO module is used at both ends

|SSH connectivity|large TCP segments over ||IPv6 tunnel when DCO module ||is used at both ends -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the

[Bug 276774] IPv6 RS/RA handling

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276774 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|n...@freebsd.org -- You are receiv

[Bug 233683] IPv6 ND neighbor solicitation messages fail to arrive

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233683 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #243488|application/mbox|text/plain mime type|

Re: Howto: ipsec tunnel routing both IPv4 and IPv6? Possible?

Me wrote: > On 15. Jan 2024, at 16:15, Michael Grimm wrote: > > Marek Zarychta wrote: >> W dniu 15.01.2024 o 15:35, Michael Grimm pisze: > >>> route_tunnel0="fd00:a:a:a::/64 fd00:a:a:a::254" > >> Please try: >> route_tunnel0="-6 -net fd00:a:a:a::/64 fd00:a:a:a::254" > > Bingo! That did the t

Re: Howto: ipsec tunnel routing both IPv4 and IPv6? Possible?

Marek Zarychta wrote: > W dniu 15.01.2024 o 15:35, Michael Grimm pisze: >> route_tunnel0="fd00:a:a:a::/64 fd00:a:a:a::254" > Please try: > route_tunnel0="-6 -net fd00:a:a:a::/64 fd00:a:a:a::254" Bingo! That did the trick: Internet6: Destination Gateway

Re: Howto: ipsec tunnel routing both IPv4 and IPv6? Possible?

W dniu 15.01.2024 o 15:35, Michael Grimm pisze: route_tunnel0="fd00:a:a:a::/64 fd00:a:a:a::254" Please try: route_tunnel0="-6 -net fd00:a:a:a::/64 fd00:a:a:a::254" -- Marek Zarychta

Re: Howto: ipsec tunnel routing both IPv4 and IPv6? Possible?

Netif Expire fd00:a:a:a::254 link#4UH ipsec0 fd00:b:b:b::250 link#3UHS lo0 Thus, the IPv6 routing is still missing (error: "route: bad address: fd00:a:a:a::"). Thank you very m

Re: Howto: ipsec tunnel routing both IPv4 and IPv6? Possible?

00 reqid: 104 pf firewall entries are set to allow esp over that tunnel. Now, I do want to route local IPv6 in addition, *if* that is possible, at all. Hi, try something like this: ifconfig_ipsec0_ipv6="inet6 fd00:b:b:b::250 fd00:a:a:a::254 prefixlen 128" -- WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >