From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 29 09:48:43 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0442473 for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 09:48:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trashcan@odo.in-berlin.de) Received: from mx1.enfer-du-nord.net (mx1.enfer-du-nord.net [91.121.60.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F2E8FC08 for ; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 09:48:43 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: nc: connect to b:b:b:b::1:1 port 53 (tcp) failed: Operation timed out From: Michael Grimm In-Reply-To: <14C709A3-B608-44C3-B12F-5F6790AA60DC@odo.in-berlin.de> Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 10:48:41 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <031FA6BE-B5A9-4197-ABAC-8883D48FA8FC@odo.in-berlin.de> References: <14C709A3-B608-44C3-B12F-5F6790AA60DC@odo.in-berlin.de> To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 09:48:43 -0000 Hi -- On 28.12.2012, at 12:59, Michael Grimm = wrote: > But without any success, so, what's going wrong here: > - Is it my setup regarding pf? > - Is it my setup in general? > - Is it a screwed IPv6 routing? > - Or something else? What I can say now, is: - It has nothing to do with my setup regarding jails. - I can reach both servers via tcp6 from remote servers, successfully. - 9.0 outgoing tcp6 to 9.1 is working. - Disabling PF at 9.1 allows outgoing tcp6 to 9.1 with enabled PF. Thus, it seems to me that the pf code in 9.1 is responsible for screwing = tcp6. I did test with: FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r244594 FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE #0 r244694 FreeBSD 9.1-PRERELEASE (GENERIC) #0 r244811 I'm interested to know if I'm the only one running into this issue? Thanks and regards, Michael