From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 13 09:17:33 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E145FA for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from schrodinger@konundrum.org) Received: from crux.konundrum.org (crux.konundrum.org [91.121.150.76]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0D76F04 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from crux.konundrum.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by crux.konundrum.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE3E31CD7F3 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:29 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at konundrum.org Received: from crux.konundrum.org ([127.0.0.1]) by crux.konundrum.org (crux.konundrum.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tehaksT+L2z0 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from defiant.konundrum.org (defiant.konundrum.org [IPv6:2001:770:146:2::1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by crux.konundrum.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F1891CD7F2 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from defiant.konundrum.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by defiant.konundrum.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r2D9HRCQ017974 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:27 GMT (envelope-from schrodinger@konundrum.org) Received: (from schrodinger@localhost) by defiant.konundrum.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id r2D9HR9C017973 for freebsd-net@freebsd.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:27 GMT (envelope-from schrodinger@konundrum.org) X-Authentication-Warning: defiant.konundrum.org: schrodinger set sender to schrodinger@konundrum.org using -f Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:27 +0000 From: Schrodinger To: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted Message-ID: <20130313091727.GA17859@defiant.konundrum.org> References: <20130312225018.GA13589@defiant.konundrum.org> <3ABB5AED-DEA9-42F6-82A1-FEA9E8BBBDCF@my.gd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="X1bOJ3K7DJ5YkBrT" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3ABB5AED-DEA9-42F6-82A1-FEA9E8BBBDCF@my.gd> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:17:33 -0000 --X1bOJ3K7DJ5YkBrT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2013/03/13 02:25, Damien Fleuriot wrote: [...] >=20 >=20 > The network is actually /48 and you get assigned a /64 inside it. >=20 > Set your interface to use the /48 prefix and voodoo will happen (I can as= sure you with a 97% certainty that your default GW is inside the /48). > Of course, using the /48 prefix doesn't mean you can/may use IPs from out= side the /64 that was given you. Voodoo, indeed... I'm sure there's a /48 used somewhere but to be more specific, or rather obvious, my default gateway resides at the boundary of a /56 - 2001:41D0:2:E700::/56 If you pay close attention you will notice that the default gateway is the last usable address from that range. I had already tried this btw, I spent some time confirming what I am was seeing; what was the actual case and ways I could perhaps change the configuration to get it Just Working. However, I would rather it worked correctly and not contain a configuration option that I either do not understand it's necessity nor do I see it as necessary. I don't claim to know IPv6 inside and out but one consideration I had was that because of the host route for the default gateway FreeBSD does not solicit for the "on-link gateway" because the interface is not set=20 to ACCEPT_RTADV. But that doesn't make immediate sense. Corrections and education welcome. >=20 >=20 > Kindly reply with topic "SOLVED" if that fixed you up, that googlers in t= he future may find the solution easily. I would, but IMO this isn't the most optimal solution; changing my prefix length so that I can reach the gateway... Can this kind of host routing just not be done ? The way I see this issue is that without ACCEPT_RTADV on my interface FreeBSD won't attempt Neighbour Solicitation for the default gateway but I am uncertain why this is the case. Bug or policy or That's How It Works. C. --=20 +---------------------------------------------------------------+ Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. MSN: schro5@hotmail.com ICQ: 112562229 GPG: http://www.konundrum.org/schro.asc --X1bOJ3K7DJ5YkBrT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJRQEQlAAoJEBBi7cjNKnTjKMUP/2YmdQ0buk+D/aF6Gzi5IWjh BQpu/UOAZLRf15dwiQVQhL13uC/mZb+JftwTVHoUtMNtyd/hQ+CLeIOZSzj9LqsX nC8kwFhJvStQMcESo0F9mZ+ejcae8PIK6n6V4t/hicLjQsuiJt+ujekdUL55CKlW ABnh/sb2Bnz5IXKoVQ/Bp/0WG68KVlo2YtNmInOBd8+HxXUil4d8yunU8cxqdHgC kuXNjmVx+EtcAgeTpmcx73fOW1n/Y2KfjvdZiSyQIbaVs0yBp2W8AJftQQrPXlXn U6RScWpUyssFlASapNjUkoKHHfDElzz2WHDDtEy5CSaCWT/5ltesh8z+tETgBY6G YyfNMykMYbmbHsDdy62JXksrqLyjmwrCEp0gmedVmQiCqIsakCUl7st71RSSlqe5 jbDxBj5DK7AVWSv/kixAI3o7dzp54AmvaVOJsr5tnx5xPLblI3Zt7FItyzUCIQ0T N09smD1OTLEIFcJz6PT7Nv/epSllNVs+r3vHFrKxxCqa09T+rhrc/A7WHG7l8Oxt pWg+cCwtqw4YX2BaP9koY+cgwEnHNTQq7/UFqxsK98E9LOUkns7NDBnpooQlNmEO UTkpW7Bi/y/ouqlbcKCU5fOQeOj2XZYkNSsCnwHOuXglp8LJ0M1guyICobhbTGq8 UBrwsZPOKyTJ3p+JF/oK =C0Wj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --X1bOJ3K7DJ5YkBrT--