Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 04:07:39 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 206012] jail(8): Cannot assign link-local IPv6 address to a jail Message-ID: <bug-206012-9824-FVf5mNHoLa@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-206012-9824@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206012 Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jamie@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #1 from Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> --- I'm not surprised such a thing wouldn't work. The IPv6 jail-related kernel code knows only IP addresses, and doesn't touch scope. These scoped link-local addresses are a little beyond me I must admit*, but I can see at least one essential jail concept breaking down in that paradigm: any IP communication of the jail with itself is forcibly rerouted to localhost - which in the IPv6 case kind of assumes the global scope where ::1 lives. I'm sure there are many other ways that are a good less simple that the whole scope concept just doesn't make it into the part of the kernel that knows/cares about jails. I imagine it would take a lot of support deep in the IPv6 code to make jails work on link-local addresses, and frankly I just don't see than happening. And I wonder if it would be a good idea anyway - shunting a link-local address off to a jail sounds it like could break things that depend on such addresses existing in a regular non-jailed way. (* It's also beyond me why a committee of people who know networking much better than I do ever though such an abomination as this out-of-band special "scope" address should even exist, but I digress). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-206012-9824-FVf5mNHoLa>