From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Liljeberg Subject: Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked Date: 11 Jul 2003 15:09:26 +0300 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <1057925366.896.24.camel@hades> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andre Tomt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Pekka Savola In-Reply-To: Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 14:48, Pekka Savola wrote: > On 11 Jul 2003, Mika Liljeberg wrote: > > 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:: > > I think that in this particular case, if should have configured your > interface address with 2002:v4:addr::/16, of which subnet anycast router > address would be 2002::. Ah ok. It *is* configured with a /16. As far as my host is concerned, 2002:c058:6301:: should be just a unicast address like any other, so maybe there is a IID==0 check somewhere? > > So apparently there really is an inappropriate subnet router anycast > > sanity check. Please fix this! > > This *may* be caused by another issue too: nexthop's must be given in the > compatible "::192.88.99.1" format, not 2002:xxxx :-( > > I sent a patch on over a year or so ago, but it didn't gain that much > enthusiasm.. I vote for fixing this too. :-) MikaL