On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 08:54:51AM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> During g2k18 I commited rad(8).
>
> The latest amd64 and i386 snapshots should contain it with enough
> features to replace rtadvd(8). If you are using rtadvd(8) I'd
> appreciate if you could switch to rad(8) and report back if any
> features are missing.
>
> The plan is to unhook rtadvd(8) from the build sooner rather than
> later and to ship 6.4 with rad(8) only.
>
Hi,
I switched my gateway to use rad instead of rtadvd.
So, some questions :-)
First the topology:
- internet connection on pppoe0
- 2 lan interfaces with ipv6: vlan92 and vlan110
I obtain ipv6 on pppoe0 with DHCPv6-PD.
My upstream send me also router-advertisement on this interface.
tcpdump output:
fe80::2a6f:7fff:fe0e:ae80 > ff02::1: icmp6: router
advertisement(chlim=64, O, pref=medium, router_ltime=1800, reachable_time=0,
retrans_time=0)(mtu: mtu=1492)(rdnss: lifetime=400s,
addr=XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX::1, addr=XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XXXX::1) [icmp6 cksum ok]
[class 0xe0] (len 64, hlim 255)
On the gateway, I use the following rad.conf file:
interface vlan92 {
dns {
resolver "XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XX5c:cabe:19ff:fee2:2ced"
}
}
interface vlan110 {
dns {
resolver "XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XX6e:cabe:19ff:fee2:2ced"
}
}
$ ifconfig vlan92
vlan92: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
lladdr c8:be:19:e2:2c:ed
index 16 priority 0 llprio 3
encap: vnetid 92 parent re0
groups: vlan
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT full-duplex)
status: active
inet 192.168.92.2 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.92.255
inet6 fe80::7f08:c8d1:d9fd:1581%vlan92 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x10
inet6 XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XX5c:cabe:19ff:fee2:2ced prefixlen 64
inet6 XXXX:XXXX:XXXX:XX5c::1 prefixlen 64 pltime 599160 vltime 2586360
For now, it works well. But I see the following in syslog:
Jul 18 10:28:05 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::7f08:c8d1:d9fd:1581 on vlan92 # from itself
Jul 18 10:28:06 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::7f08:c8d1:d9fd:1581 on vlan110 # from itself
Jul 18 10:29:24 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::2a6f:7fff:fe0e:ae80 on pppoe0 # not managed interface
Jul 18 10:31:12 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::f280:16b4:9c3b:5f8f on vlan92
Jul 18 10:32:19 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::2a6f:7fff:fe0e:ae80 on pppoe0 # not managed interface
Jul 18 10:33:33 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::7f08:c8d1:d9fd:1581 on vlan92 # from itself
Jul 18 10:35:28 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::2a6f:7fff:fe0e:ae80 on pppoe0 # not managed interface
Jul 18 10:36:49 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::7f08:c8d1:d9fd:1581 on vlan110 # from itself
Jul 18 10:38:04 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::2a6f:7fff:fe0e:ae80 on pppoe0 # not managed interface
Jul 18 10:40:08 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::7f08:c8d1:d9fd:1581 on vlan92 # from itself
Jul 18 10:40:47 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::2a6f:7fff:fe0e:ae80 on pppoe0 # not managed interface
Jul 18 10:41:58 alf rad[86733]: RA or RS with hop limit of 255 from
fe80::61fd:ac94:2a15:bd0b on vlan92
rad(8) seems to log RA/RS from all interfaces:
- from interface not configured for being managed by itself, like pppoe0
- from interface managed by itself and RA sent by itself (shouldn't it
know it sent it ?)
- from interface managed by itself and RA/RS sent by someone else
I am unsure about the purpose of this log: it seems to be an
unconditional log on RA/RS reception.
It could have value for RA/RS where it isn't sent by rad(8) itself, and
if it is on some configured interface for rad(8). For others cases, I am
unsure.
Thanks for the clarification.
--
Sebastien Marie
