From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Oct 17 01:48:30 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BCA5E4D2F1 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 01:48:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lew@perftech.com) Received: from smtp-gw.pt.net (smtp-gw.pt.net [206.210.194.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "smtp-gw.pt.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 562F97716F for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 01:48:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lew@perftech.com) X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1508203932-09411a0f9b3265b0001-Pd2ruv Received: from mail.pt.net (mail.pt.net [206.210.194.11]) by smtp-gw.pt.net with ESMTP id Igi4P1zpxaI9Xq2Z (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:12 -0500 (CDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: lew@perftech.com X-Barracuda-Effective-Source-IP: mail.pt.net[206.210.194.11] X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 206.210.194.11 Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail.pt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA8784265B for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail.pt.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail.pt.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id QaWyaJYsZ6Cd for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail.pt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A21784265C for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:12 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at pt.net Received: from mail.pt.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail.pt.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id sPp0OaJ5QpYP for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from lewhome-dhcp-179.pt.net (lewhome-dhcp-179.pt.net [206.210.207.179]) (Authenticated sender: lew@pt.net) by mail.pt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E4D4184265B for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:11 -0500 (CDT) From: Lewis Donzis Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Subject: Re: [Bug 221385] [Regression] v6 mapped v4 addresses not working in 11.1 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:32:11 -0500 X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [Bug 221385] [Regression] v6 mapped v4 addresses not working in 11.1 References: To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <490283D6-C663-46BE-9125-CCD9C49CD0BF@perftech.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) X-Barracuda-Connect: mail.pt.net[206.210.194.11] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1508203932 X-Barracuda-Encrypted: ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 X-Barracuda-URL: https://smtp-gw.pt.net:443/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at pt.net X-Barracuda-Scan-Msg-Size: 3549 X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.82 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.82 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=9.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE_2 X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.3.43956 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.00 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars 0.82 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE_2 RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 01:48:30 -0000 Would appreciate some guidance on this. It seems like a reasonably = serious regression, so I=E2=80=99m surprised it hasn=E2=80=99t already = been fixed. Since all of our code binds a particular library, we were able to work = around it by overriding the weak referenced socket() with our own = version that creates the socket and explicitly turns off the V6ONLY = option, but that doesn=E2=80=99t help with third-party applications. Thanks, lew > On Sep 13, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Lewis Donzis wrote: >=20 > Hello. >=20 > This particular bug is a real problem in our embedded system, and = we=E2=80=99re trying to decide whether to go back to 11.0 or wait for a = patch for 11.1. >=20 > We downloaded just the one file containing the fix, but it wouldn=E2=80=99= t compile, so we downloaded -CURRENT and verified that it works fine. = But it=E2=80=99s unclear to me whether the code in -CURRENT is slated = for an 11.1 patch, or if it won=E2=80=99t show up until 11.2 or even = 12.0. I see the "mfc-stable11 = =E2=80=9D = flag on the bug set to a value of =E2=80=9C?=E2=80=9D. Is that = significant? >=20 > Perhaps someone can help us understand how to determine when and in = which version a fix will show up. >=20 > Thanks, > lew >=20