similar to: [Bug 981] table of AF inet does not accept ether, while ip and ip6 do

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1414 Bug ID: 1414 Summary: Using ip6 daddr in nat input chain is rejected with an incorrect error Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Ubuntu Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1032 Arturo Borrero Gonzalez <arturo.borrero.glez at gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |arturo.borrero.glez at gmail.c | |om ---

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1398 Bug ID: 1398 Summary: tproxy rule is not matched for ip6 Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Ubuntu Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: kernel Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1468 Bug ID: 1468 Summary: [netdev] dropping ether type vlan frames drops ICMPv6 type 134 Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: other OS: Debian GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1032 Florian Westphal <fw at strlen.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fw at strlen.de Assignee|pablo at netfilter.org |fw at strlen.de --- Comment #2 from Florian

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1032 Florian Westphal <fw at strlen.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1428 Bug ID: 1428 Summary: Unable to dnat to port without defining destination address in inet table Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component:

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1073 Bug ID: 1073 Summary: inet-service vs icmp conflict Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: nft Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org Reporter:

I know I have some quirky behavior involving my layer two tinc host, and the IPv6 subnet that runs off of it. Facebook just issued a kernel patch that changes the behavior of the IPv6 tunnel mechanism: I can't tell from the patch itself, if it might also improve functionality for non IP6-IP6 tunnels.

Some of my Windows hosts where the main tinc router is, can't ping out to IPv6 external sites. I don't think its a tinc problem though: I use Quagga for routing. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://www.tinc-vpn.org/pipermail/tinc-devel/attachments/20120612/0dd54f13/attachment.html>

??? This is solved. ? Problem was, incorrect settings in slapd.conf and dynamic / config file setup was mixed. ? str2entry: invalid value for attributeType objectClass #1 (syntax?1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38) slapcat: bad configuration file! The core.schema and the core.ldif are bit different. debian installs slapd with dynamic ( in database ) config, when switch back to config file setup. The

Hi all. I am setting ADDC on Debian 9 from default repo and have two questions. This is my smb.conf [global]     netbios name = MYSERVER     realm = MYSERVER.EXAMPLE.COM     workgroup = MYDOMAIN     dns forwarder = HERE_EXTERNAL_DNS     server role = active directory domain controller     idmap_ldb:use rfc2307 = yes [netlogon]     path = /var/lib/samba/sysvol/fileserver.ekostroyrus.ru/scripts

Today I received an allocation of IP6 addresses for some servers. I can 'play' with the last 2 of the 8 IP6 address segments. I always thought, mistakenly, IP6 was 6 segments, because it was IP6. IP4 had 4 segments. However IP6 is actually IP version 6 and it has 8 segments. The other interesting discovers are: :: means one or more 0 segments, example :: can mean 0:0:0: or just 0:0: or

Author: pwernau Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: b3afdaefb7d45f88f10766a716398f06d290cfb6 Log message: 6393049 in.ndpd[XXXXX]: phyint_init_from_k: SIOCSLIFLNKINFO (interface ip6.tunN): Invalid argument Files: update: usr/src/cmd/cmd-inet/usr.lib/in.ndpd/tables.c

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1071 Bug ID: 1071 Summary: nftables: set does not work within inet table with option flags interval Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: nft

I imagine some day in the near future there will be a switch to ipv6. I cannot imagine ever remembering the ip address then...crazy. My question, since i have never done ip6 stuff, is what does that mean on my webservers? Would I just need to replace my ip4 with ip6 in my eths, bonds, bridges, and configuration files...and copy out my iptables to ip6tables, and change the dns servers? all

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1359 Bug ID: 1359 Summary: nft 0.9.1 - table family inet, chain type nat, fails to auto-load modules Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1173 Bug ID: 1173 Summary: Documentation/error messages around NAT statements in "inet" tables incorrect Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: P5

Hello, I just read this document, especially the section about Tinc : http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/linux_vpn.txt It's an old one, but i would like to know the state of the Tinc security level for now. I don't scared about possible security weakness of Tinc because i only use it over our internal operator network (MPLS), but maybe one day will come the need to connect a

Hello all, It would be a great feature if QOS could be implemented in Tinc. It's not to do any sort of comparison, but with OpenVPN, the traffic can be shapped. In the way that tinc works as mesh VPN, the great feature would be to fix a shapping value on each nodes, known and respected by each others. (like MPLS does) As an exemple, you've got 3 nodes A,B and C, you want Tinc flows on A