Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked | From | Mika Liljeberg <> | Date | 11 Jul 2003 14:36:36 +0300 |
| |
Ok,
Here's a valid use for subnet router anycase that isn't working. Somebody asked me how to set up 6to4, so I did a little testing.
Doesn't work:
hades:~# ip route add ::/0 via 2002:c058:6301:: RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument
Works:
hades:~# ip route add ::/0 via 2002:c058:6301::1
Unfortunately the first form is what I need:
hades:~# host -t AAAA 6to4.ipv6.funet.fi 6to4.ipv6.funet.fi has AAAA address 2001:708:0:1::624 6to4.ipv6.funet.fi has AAAA address 2002:c058:6301::
So apparently there really is an inappropriate subnet router anycast sanity check. Please fix this!
MikaL
On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 08:22, Pekka Savola wrote: > On 11 Jul 2003, Mika Liljeberg wrote: > > On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 07:51, Pekka Savola wrote: > > > Well, the system may make some sense, but IMHO, there is still zero sense > > > in policing this thing when you add a route. That's just plain bogus. > > > This is a bug which must be fixed ASAP. > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong but I think in this case the interface had > > forwarding enabled and the sanity check in fact prevented a default > > route pointing to the node itself from being configured. > > > > Otherwise I fully agree. The subnet router anycast address doesn't > > warrant any special handling. > > If that's the case, it's OK -- it's OK, I don't remember the details. > > (It might be nice to have configurable /proc option on whether to enable > the subnet router anycast address at all, but that's also a different > story..) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |