From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Mon Jul 19 19:40:45 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5280365D3FE for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 19:40:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com) Received: from echo.brtsvcs.net (echo.brtsvcs.net [IPv6:2607:f740:c::4ae]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4GTBz02Grwz3M1S for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 19:40:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com) Received: from chombo.houseloki.net (unknown [IPv6:2602:41:642b:600::6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "chombo.houseloki.net", Issuer "brtsvcs.net CA" (verified OK)) by echo.brtsvcs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C95CA38D62 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 19:40:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2602:41:642b:630:8c73:b617:8e8e:d5ff] (unknown [IPv6:2602:41:642b:630:8c73:b617:8e8e:d5ff]) by chombo.houseloki.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28EFB4653 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 12:40:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Specifying IPv6 off-link for a subnet To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <5ea688b3-79b9-8a28-0430-5a4651207ae0@bluerosetech.com> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: Mel Pilgrim Message-ID: <010afd33-d7e5-b8b5-229e-823aa007a045@bluerosetech.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 12:40:35 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4GTBz02Grwz3M1S X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com designates 2607:f740:c::4ae as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.30 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[2607:f740:c::4ae:from]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[2607:f740:c::4ae:from:127.0.2.255]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[bluerosetech.com]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:2607:f740:c::/48, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-questions] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 19:40:45 -0000 On 2021-07-18 17:07, Scott wrote: > On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 07:43:48PM -0700, Mel Pilgrim wrote: >> On 2021-07-05 8:45, Scott wrote: >>> I have manually configured IPv6 on the interfaces: >>> ifconfig_vmx0_ipv6="inet6 xx::yy prefer_source accept_rtadv -autoconf no_radr" [...] >>> Here's the received RA: [...] >>> prefix info option (3), length 32 (4): xx::/64, Flags [none], valid >>> time 3600s, pref. time 60s >>> >>> Note that there is no L flag set, so the prefix is off-link. >> >> If set, the L flag indicates the prefix can be used for on-link >> determination. But if the L bit is unset, the PIO isn't making any >> assertion about the prefix being on-link or off-link. More importantly, >> a host must not use a PIO with L=0 to conclude a prefix is off-link. >> >> IOW, it is correct for a host to do nothing when it receives an RA PIO >> with no flags for an already-configured prefix. > > so for the case of manually addressed devices on a private vLAN/IPPL there > must be a way to specify that the configured prefix is not on-Link. Yes, by not configuring that prefix. Numbering vmx0 into xx::/64 made xx::/64 on-link by definition. This seems like too intuitive of an answer, though. Can you step back and explain what you need to do at a higher level?