From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mika_Penttil=E4?= Subject: Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 22:57:12 +0300 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <3F0DC518.3010301@kolumbus.fi> References: <20030710154302.GE1722@zip.com.au> <20030711.005542.04973601.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cat@zip.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, pekkas@netcore.fi Return-path: To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?YOSHIFUJI_Hideaki_/_=3F=3F=3F=3F?= Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org But 3ffe:8001:000c:ffff::36 is _not_ subnet routers anycast address. Anyway, looks like a bug to me... --Mika YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ???? wrote: >In article <20030710154302.GE1722@zip.com.au> (at Fri, 11 Jul 2003 01:43:03 +1000), CaT says: > > > >>With 2.4.21-pre2 I can get a nice tunnel going over my ppp connection >>and as such get ipv6 connectivity. I think went to 2.4.21 and then to >>2.4.22-pre4 and bringing up the tunnel fails as follows: >> >> >: > > >>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 >> >> > >This is not bug, but rather misconfiguration; >you cannot use prefix::, which is mandatory subnet routers >anycast address, as unicast address. > >Thank you. > > >