From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 13 11:16:55 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F1AFF0B for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:16:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@my.gd) Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com (mail-wi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::233]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96FB38E0 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:16:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id ez12so653244wid.6 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 04:16:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date :to:x-gm-message-state; bh=ZgK761DN4zS0P87RVDmSd1HUQ3H6Glfe6aozFVOF0OM=; b=B/0HhMWWprOF0PKEg1mVuPUdm/p/Yl0DdRaypR8LOkqUZkUQroWjMJo4ksb3dKTmUe QpZjnDrT2Iw67lc0AzlIqC+aDy3yccradzSc8uEy4ehkJgLnhh38o+0+lNpiwWXynLsi ex+JkAIWwJWRWGm+/W1lZR6h8fJuAKdkigeVWPvcKM3U1p6F+UgB2S7FyLvR0UPBKQyJ 0Dg3kkAZ1J9tLcOfVZ1zkg8P/Ko2rhoqGvw9ZLRo8HjGTCCtVM0juVUry4VI/VkRbzFA uuzwy6mBWVsLBsCuFYbWdWyEw4yznH++sEPMkn8it8MTTiSNhAOqWH6NRxTQoZDXAvy+ EaTA== X-Received: by 10.194.242.163 with SMTP id wr3mr33048983wjc.35.1363173413808; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 04:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.41.32.4] ([92.90.16.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q2sm2271781wiz.8.2013.03.13.04.16.50 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Mar 2013 04:16:53 -0700 (PDT) References: <20130312225018.GA13589@defiant.konundrum.org> <3ABB5AED-DEA9-42F6-82A1-FEA9E8BBBDCF@my.gd> <20130313091727.GA17859@defiant.konundrum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: <20130313091727.GA17859@defiant.konundrum.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B144) From: Damien Fleuriot Subject: Re: ipv6 default router Operation not permitted Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:16:27 +0100 To: Schrodinger X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmEGEkHBbsDA8k6/uFoIcIIaEJ8EPihttvRhk8BswFv9RVLDXiWuHL0DB1jG5bBEqJYAQzY Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" 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 11:16:55 -0000 On 13 Mar 2013, at 10:17, Schrodinger wrote: > On 2013/03/13 02:25, Damien Fleuriot wrote: >=20 > [...] >=20 >>=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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > Corrections and education welcome. >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Kindly reply with topic "SOLVED" if that fixed you up, that googlers in t= he future may find the solution easily. >=20 > 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. >=20 > C. > --=20 The thing is, your gateway sitting there in the middle of a /48 or /56 has t= o do with how OVH distributes IPv6 prefixes and how they configure their rou= ters. FreeBSD's hardly responsible here. I've had the very same problem with the very same host, hence why I immediat= ely pointed out using a smaller prefix. This is the same use case as getting A /29 assignment inside a /24, but havi= ng to use /24 anyway because the host: - doesn't want to bother configuring a gateway for each customer within its /= 24 (likely the case with ipv6) - doesn't want to waste IPs (likely the case with ipv4) Using a smaller prefix of /56 effectively puts you in the correct network an= d gives you the ability to reach the GW, just keep to your /64 for assignmen= ts ;)=