Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 23:24:27 -0400 From: Chris Ross <cross+freebsd@distal.com> To: Ronald Klop <ronald-lists@klop.ws>, Tom Pusateri <pusateri@keehole.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPv6 networking problems in 14.3 Message-ID: <90A490DE-6BF0-4EBB-97CE-ECA690E2359C@distal.com> In-Reply-To: <55365E3D-B7EA-4F95-BC1E-92910A2944EA@distal.com> References: <910737314.4002.1757962919189@localhost> <55365E3D-B7EA-4F95-BC1E-92910A2944EA@distal.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Sep 15, 2025, at 18:54, Chris Ross <cross+freebsd@distal.com> = wrote: >=20 >> On Sep 15, 2025, at 15:01, Ronald Klop <ronald-lists@klop.ws> wrote: >>=20 >> Are you able to boot a 14.2 kernel? >> To split the search space in two.=20 >=20 > I could do that. What=E2=80=99s the easy way to get an unpacked 14.2 = generic amd64 kernel? Well, okay, that was something. I extracted a 14.2-RELEASE /boot/kernel = and was able to boot into it. The system came up far more properly than it = had under 14.1-RELEASE-p5 tried earlier. (Resource limits couldn=E2=80=99t = be applied in rc.subr with 14.1). But, the IPv6 routing problem still exposed = itself. Then, just to confirm, I rebooted into 14.1-RELEASE-p5 again. This was where things stopped being useful. This _also_ failed in the same way the more recent kernels had. I don=E2=80=99t _think_ I changed anything = between the last time I tested that, just selecting a different kernel from the boot menu, but this time it didn=E2=80=99t magically work. So, I = can=E2=80=99t say any longer that it=E2=80=99s necessarily a regression between 14.1p5 and = 14.3. I mean, I could try resetting my whole image to a snapshot from 14.1 (ZFS root), but I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s worth that effort. >> On Sep 15, 2025, at 15:05, Tom Pusateri <pusateri@keehole.org> wrote: >>=20 >> I would try running the 14.3p2 system without the VLAN configuration = and a direct connection to the upstream provider hardware (no switch) = and see if the problem persists. That will determine if it=E2=80=99s a = VLAN issue. >=20 > That would be a bit of work. I have an available ix port, so I can = run a line to the machine > without vlan. It would still be a VLAN in the switch, because running = a direct line is not > possible without much rewiring and very long cables.=20 So this is my next attempt. I don=E2=80=99t know if I have the energy = for the whole thing tonight, but I=E2=80=99ll start running cables and configuring the = switch at least. See where I get. :-) Thanks all for your time, I am just more confused now. - Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?90A490DE-6BF0-4EBB-97CE-ECA690E2359C>