On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:04:18 +0100 Daniel Bilik <ddb at neosystem.org> wrote:> A week ago I upgraded two systems where stf(4) is used. They were running > 10-stable from beginning of September, with stf working fine. After > upgrade, the address on stf0 stays "tentative" indefinitely.I've finally got some time to analyze this more thoroughly. And indeed, the problem was introduced with both r287734 (changes to in6if_do_dad() in sys/netinet6/in6.c) and r290348 (changes to nd6_timer() in sys/netinet6/nd6.c), specifically in combination with stf(4) interfaces not being marked "running". Attached patch fixes that. Should I create PR for this? -- Dan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dad-on-stf.diff Type: text/x-diff Size: 672 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20160113/71e9a50a/attachment.diff>
Added hrs@ to CC. On 1/13/16, Daniel Bilik <ddb at neosystem.org> wrote:> On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:04:18 +0100 > Daniel Bilik <ddb at neosystem.org> wrote: > >> A week ago I upgraded two systems where stf(4) is used. They were running >> 10-stable from beginning of September, with stf working fine. After >> upgrade, the address on stf0 stays "tentative" indefinitely. > > I've finally got some time to analyze this more thoroughly. And indeed, > the problem was introduced with both r287734 (changes to in6if_do_dad() in > sys/netinet6/in6.c) and r290348 (changes to nd6_timer() in > sys/netinet6/nd6.c), specifically in combination with stf(4) interfaces not > being > marked "running". Attached patch fixes that. Should I create PR for this? > > -- > Dan >
On Wed, 13 Jan 2016 09:17:30 +0100 Daniel Bilik <ddb at neosystem.org> wrote:> Should I create PR for this?Created: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206231 -- Dan
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 10:49:37 +0100 Daniel Bilik <ddb at neosystem.org> wrote:>> Should I create PR for this? > Created: > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206231Seems that 10-stable has just entered beta1, so unless some effort is put into fixing this, 10.3-release is probably gonna ship with broken 6to4 connectivity. -- Dan