ipv6 only host and no IPV4 in jail?

Hi all, I have a weird issue there, I have an ipv6 only host aon which I am starting a jail.Jalil have a vnet interface through a bridge created on the host: For some reason the jail can't get access and is not accessible to internet when I setup an IPV4 on it (and right gateway). Is this some

Re: ipv6 only host and no IPV4 in jail?

Hi, since your VNET jail has its own network stack, it shouldn't matter that your host is IPv6-only. I myself run dual-stack Bastille jails on IPv6-only hosts without any problems. What kind of errors do you get when trying to access the internet via IPv4 from your jail, and does it work with I

[Bug 274009] in_pcblookup_hash_locked: invalid local address panic on sendto(2) to ipv4-mapped

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=274009 --- Comment #9 from Benjamin Jacobs --- (In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #6) Hi, yes it does seem to be that same issue. (In reply to Michael Tuexen from comment #8) My 2 cents: the version flag is indeed tricky because - as noted

[Bug 274009] in_pcblookup_hash_locked: invalid local address panic on sendto(2) to ipv4-mapped

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=274009 --- Comment #10 from Benjamin Jacobs --- Created attachment 245375 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=245375&action=edit Adds a flag argument to in_pcb_lport_dest to support v4-mapped -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 274009] in_pcblookup_hash_locked: invalid local address panic on sendto(2) to ipv4-mapped

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=274009 --- Comment #11 from Gleb Smirnoff --- What about adding extra inp_vflag for mapped pcbs? So that in_pcb.c code can tell regular IPv4 inpcb from mapped one? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 264014] QinQ not working with a lot of switches

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264014 --- Comment #1 from Zhenlei Huang --- The IEEE 802.1AD published at May 26,2006 [1]. That is about 17 years ago at the time writing. > There are a lot of switches on the market with QinQ support, but not all > support > QinQ according to

[Bug 264014] QinQ not working with a lot of switches

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264014 --- Comment #2 from Layer8 --- Thanks for reqly, Zhenlei Huang. The assumption that only old devices which are End of Life use non 802.1AD compliant Ethertypes is unfortunately not correct. Because I dont know every switch OS on the mark

[Bug 264014] QinQ not working with a lot of switches

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264014 --- Comment #3 from Layer8 --- Oh, forgot to add the following information: Yes, its possible to change the QinQ Ethertype in Dell OS6, but we have customers with grown environments where they dont want to change the ethertype because of l

[Bug 274009] in_pcblookup_hash_locked: invalid local address panic on sendto(2) to ipv4-mapped

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=274009 --- Comment #12 from Michael Tuexen --- (In reply to Gleb Smirnoff from comment #11) Why? Don't we know the state right now from inp_vflag? We just adapt the value to the usage of the inp. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are o

[Bug 206544] sendmsg(2) (sendto(2) too?) can fail with EINVAL; isn't documented in manpage

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206544 Peter Jeremy changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pet...@freebsd.org --- Comment #7 f