Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:04:26 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-jail@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Problem using bz's multi-IP/IPv6/No-IP Jail Patch (7-STABLE) Message-ID: <20090310110332.Q96785@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <49B55CA2.7090300@FreeBSD.org> References: <d1556b2b0903081122p1753b34ej3677083988124805@mail.gmail.com> <d1556b2b0903081405r62961134i1296c571b22eac95@mail.gmail.com> <49B55CA2.7090300@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Jamie Gritton wrote: > Kage wrote: > >> Encountering more issues now. Binding just an IPv6 address to a jail >> shows up in jls -v, but when I run ifconfig -a in the jail, I get an >> error I've never encountered, and doesn't show up on any Google >> search: >> >> [root@nub:/etc] jls -v >> JID Hostname Path >> Name State >> CPUSetID >> IP Address(es) >> 9 jail.template.tld /usr/jails/TEMPLATE >> ALIVE >> 10 >> 2610:150:c248:dead:beef:c0ff:eec0:deaa >> >> [root@jail:/] ifconfig -a >> ifconfig: socket(family 2,SOCK_DGRAM): Protocol not supported > > Recent patches reject sockets in jails that have no addresses in the > socket's family. So if you jail has no IPv6 addresses, you won't be > able to create any IPv6 sockets. Likewise your case: if that jail has > no IPv4 addresses, then it's an IPv4-less jail, and IPv4 sockets won't > work (Protocol not supported). For actual network connections, this > makes sense: you won't be able to bind or connect with this socket, as > there are no IPv4 addresses in the system. > > But ifconfig is a different situation. It just needs a socket of some > sort, and AF_INET has always worked, because any networked system always > has IPv4 support. But in an IPv4-less system (which an IPv4-less jail > not acts like), this default isn't useful. Something will need to be > fixed. I'm not sure if that something is ifconfig or the kernel. I'd suggest fixing ifconfig if (easily) possible; that would avoid us running into it again in a few months/year(s) when it might be possible to compile an INET6 but no INET kernel. -- Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090310110332.Q96785>