From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 28 14:46:27 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E25E106566B for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:46:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpaasial@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A3FA8FC15 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:46:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so7510452vbm.13 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 07:46:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=LXvHwxlsnLaMJH7B05ZUXEYpnj+WbtdTUg2a8OvtHiQ=; b=V5NNEhY/6Yk+h0wWXud8Ckp0i4duRwfvLGsb4RvEzC2Am8svaIUVYZZFQW/X0Ty/gX MPew/PWWNg+11faqKNKksEVVdR26Hz838ttaYQ4D3vKYR7U2fuYoLP8L4zJ+T4LM2ZcI 5Clk1zuXWm71yCpIgZGvpo6UZ0NCXmhcgtZm72AR59Fnuw/jaMXGhgXMzX9d9v284vzv rsPYtDWMVZAwL9dSnkn5EPZetzC5z+Tflz1lbQa/CB+vpSq2RxqvlRKhJRKzuufKP/dX s1jydnjjfgExj5CZ9zbf438v+jbyW0hm7ChlYCyaJ1zsqviDt3+OKGZQa1d2+OPlarsS Es7A== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.142.79 with SMTP id p15mr13905315vcu.24.1346165186170; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 07:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.230.134 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 07:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:46:26 +0300 Message-ID: From: Kimmo Paasiala To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: IPv6 default route. Can't see the wood for the trees. X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:46:27 -0000 > On 8/27/2012 12:27 PM, Christian Laursen wrote: >> On 08/27/12 21:03, John Hawkes-Reed wrote: >>> On 27/08/2012 19:06, Christian Laursen wrote: >>>> On 08/27/12 18:49, John Hawkes-Reed wrote: >>>>> rc.conf: >>>>> >>>>> (I'm not convinced that obfuscating the addresses is worth the >>>>> confusion) >>>>> >>>>> ipv6_gateway_enable="YES" >>>>> ip6addrctl_verbose="YES" >>>>> rtadvd_enable="YES" >>>>> rtadvd_interfaces="rl0" >>>>> ipv6_cpe_wanif="pcn0" >>>>> ipv6_defaultrouter="2001:470:1f0a:b5a::1" >>>>> gif_interfaces="gif0" >>>>> gifconfig_gif0="192.168.1.100 216.66.80.30" >>>>> ifconfig_gif0_ipv6="inet6 2001:470:1f0a:b5a::2 2001:470:1f0a:b5a::1 >>>>> prefixlen 128" >>>>> ifconfig_pcn0_ipv6="inet6 2001:470:1f0b:b5a::4 prefixlen 64" >>>>> ifconfig_rl0_ipv6="inet6 2001:470:1f0b:b5a::3 prefixlen 64 >>>>> -accept_rtadv" >>>> >>>> It looks like you are trying to use the /64 used for your tunnel on the >>>> inside network. That's probably what causes the problem. >>>> >>>> You should use the "Routed /64" on the inside. If you need more than one >>>> /64, you can request a /48. >>> >>> I think I am. The endpoints are ...:1f0A: and the /64 is ...:1f0B: >> >> Sorry, my bad. >> >> Are pcn0 and rl0 both connected to internal networks? >> >> Having the same /64 configured on both is probably bad. > > Why would it be? > > > -- You can't have the exact same prefix on two different interfaces, there's no way to decide where to route traffic going to that prefix if there's two equal routes in the routing table. -Kimmo