netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked

To: Mika Liljeberg <mika.liljeberg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked
From: CaT <cat@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:39:31 +1000
Cc: yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1057854432.3588.2.camel@hades>
Organisation: Furball Inc.
References: <20030710154302.GE1722@xxxxxxxxxx> <1057854432.3588.2.camel@hades>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 07:27:13PM +0300, Mika Liljeberg wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-10 at 18:43, CaT wrote:
> > ip tunnel add sit1 mode sit remote 138.25.6.14
> > ip link set sit1 up
> > ip addr add 3ffe:8001:000c:ffff::37/127 dev sit1
> >  ip route add ::/0 via 3ffe:8001:000c:ffff::36 
> > RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument
> 
> Try this:
> 
> ip route add ::/0 dev sit1

That didn't complain but pings to the ext gw were broken. Noticed the
route contained:

3ffe:8001:c:ffff::36/127 via :: dev sit1  proto kernel  metric 256  mtu 1480 adv
mss 1420

And having remembered /127 being mentioned as bad I changed the
interface config to a netmask of /64. Dropped it and brought it
up and it all works.

There's something fundamental about ipv6 netmasks that I just don't
understand...

-- 
"How can I not love the Americans? They helped me with a flat tire the
other day," he said.
        - 
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?SearchID=73139162287496&Avis=TO&Dato=20030624&Kategori=NEWS28&Lopenr=106240111&Ref=AR

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>