Hello all, I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like to configure a dual stack for some services, such as DNS and Web Server. First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure IPv6 in Dom0? I''m not sure, but I dont think so, since from Dom0 using loopback address I can ping the IPv6 address from my router. Well, thinking that it is not mandatory, I configured an IPv6 address in DomU: # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 10.0.0.100 gateway 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 10.0.0.255 iface eth0 inet6 static address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 netmask 126 gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My routes seems to be OK. Should I configure something else? I was looking in google and saw some people saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, specially the line "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1", but this dont did any difference. I''m using these packets into a Debian Squeeze: # dpkg -l | grep xen ii libxenstore3.0 4.0.1-5.2 Xenstore communications library for Xen ii linux-image-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 2.6.32-45 Linux 2.6.32 for 64-bit PCs, Xen dom0 support ii xen-hypervisor-4.0-amd64 4.0.1-5.2 The Xen Hypervisor on AMD64 ii xen-linux-system-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 2.6.32-45 Xen system with Linux 2.6.32 on 64-bit PCs (meta-package) ii xen-tools 4.2-1 Tools to manage Xen virtual servers ii xen-utils-4.0 4.0.1-5.2 XEN administrative tools ii xen-utils-common 4.0.0-1 XEN administrative tools - common files ii xenstore-utils 4.0.1-5.2 Xenstore utilities for Xen And my xend-config.sxp is set to use: (network-script ''network-bridge antispoof=yes'') (vif-script vif-bridge) I appreciate any help. Regards, ------------------------------- Carlos Eduardo Ribas _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
Carlos Ribas wrote:>I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like to configure a >dual stack for some services, such as DNS and Web Server. > >First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure IPv6 in Dom0? >I''m not sure, but I dont think so, since from Dom0 using loopback >address I can ping the IPv6 address from my router.You don''t need any address of Dom0 (I''m assuming you are using bridging ?) I have one DomU running IPv6 for testing (DNS, Web server), Dom0 and the rest of the network is IPv4 only - well as much as you can when everything defaults to at least configuring link-local IPv6 addresses.># The primary network interface >auto eth0 >iface eth0 inet static > address 10.0.0.100 > gateway 10.0.0.1 > netmask 255.255.255.0 > broadcast 10.0.0.255 > >iface eth0 inet6 static > address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 > netmask 126 > gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5That looks OK, I''m running a Hurricane Electric tunnel so mine looks different.>But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My routes seems to >be OK. Should I configure something else? I was looking in google >and saw some people saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, >specially the line "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1", but this dont >did any difference.I have "post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding" in the IPv6 stanza in my /etc/network/interfaces. But that is only needed to make the machine route packets between networks (ie act as a router for other devices'' traffic), it will still talk to other devices without this.>(network-script ''network-bridge antispoof=yes'') >(vif-script vif-bridge)Standard advice now is not to use a network-script. It made sense a while back, but the scripts are deprecated and the host OS generally has better tools. For example, in Debian you can put something like this in /etc/network/interfaces : auto br0 iface br0 inet static bridge_ports eth0 address a.b.c.d netmask 255.255.255.0 One things I suggest it might be worth looking at is your subnet mask. Try using 64 instead of 126 and see if it makes any difference. While technically a 126 bit netmask ought to work on a P-P link, in practice I believe there are a lot of things that break if you go less than 64 bits for the host part of the address. Also, "ip -6 neigh" will show you the known IPv6 neighbours (roughly equivalent to ARP cache for Ipv4). That may help in debugging. -- Simon Hobson Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books.
Hello Simon, Yes, I''m using bridging. I put 126 as subnet mask because I configured a P-P link. Unfortunately use 64 makes no difference. However, the command you said showed me that something is wrong: # ip -6 neigh 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE I was cheking only with this command (and looking at red line, I thought that it was all fine): # route -A inet6 Kernel IPv6 routing table Destination Next Hop Flag Met Ref Use If 2001:xxxx:xxxx::4/126 :: Ue 256 0 4 eth0 fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth0 *::/0 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 UG 1 0 0 eth0* ::/0 fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 UGDAe 1024 0 0 eth0 ::/0 :: !n -1 1 73 lo ::1/128 :: Un 0 1 23 lo 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6/128 :: Un 0 1 24 lo fe80::216:3eff:fee2:3f3d/128 :: Un 0 1 0 lo ff00::/8 :: U 256 0 0 eth0 ::/0 :: !n -1 1 73 lo I will investigate further more. Do you think there are something wrong with "network-script" that can cause this? I hope not! :) Thanks, ------------------------------- Carlos Eduardo Ribas 2012/7/18 Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>> Carlos Ribas wrote: > > I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like to configure a dual >> stack for some services, such as DNS and Web Server. >> >> First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure IPv6 in Dom0? I''m >> not sure, but I dont think so, since from Dom0 using loopback address I can >> ping the IPv6 address from my router. >> > > You don''t need any address of Dom0 (I''m assuming you are using bridging ?) > > I have one DomU running IPv6 for testing (DNS, Web server), Dom0 and the > rest of the network is IPv4 only - well as much as you can when everything > defaults to at least configuring link-local IPv6 addresses. > > > # The primary network interface >> auto eth0 >> iface eth0 inet static >> address 10.0.0.100 >> gateway 10.0.0.1 >> netmask 255.255.255.0 >> broadcast 10.0.0.255 >> >> iface eth0 inet6 static >> address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 >> netmask 126 >> gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 >> > > That looks OK, I''m running a Hurricane Electric tunnel so mine looks > different. > > > But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My routes seems to be >> OK. Should I configure something else? I was looking in google and saw some >> people saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, specially the line >> "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=**1", but this dont did any difference. >> > > I have "post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/**forwarding" in the > IPv6 stanza in my /etc/network/interfaces. But that is only needed to make > the machine route packets between networks (ie act as a router for other > devices'' traffic), it will still talk to other devices without this. > > > (network-script ''network-bridge antispoof=yes'') >> (vif-script vif-bridge) >> > > Standard advice now is not to use a network-script. It made sense a while > back, but the scripts are deprecated and the host OS generally has better > tools. For example, in Debian you can put something like this in > /etc/network/interfaces : > auto br0 > iface br0 inet static > bridge_ports eth0 > address a.b.c.d > netmask 255.255.255.0 > > One things I suggest it might be worth looking at is your subnet mask. Try > using 64 instead of 126 and see if it makes any difference. While > technically a 126 bit netmask ought to work on a P-P link, in practice I > believe there are a lot of things that break if you go less than 64 bits > for the host part of the address. > > Also, "ip -6 neigh" will show you the known IPv6 neighbours (roughly > equivalent to ARP cache for Ipv4). That may help in debugging. > > -- > Simon Hobson > > Visit http://www.**magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/<http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/>for books by acclaimed > author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as > Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books. >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
Hi,
as Simon already wrote, try to use your provisioned "regular" ipv6
net.
This is usally
a /48 or /64.
Our dom0 don''t have ipv6 configured in any way, it''s just
enabled by
default.
Only the usual local-link (fe80...) addresses are bound to the
interfaces.
If you''re using bridges (peth0 -> eth0 -> vifX.X), you
don''t have to
touch any
forwarding settings. It''s "just working".
If you''re using fixed addresses, don''t forget to disable
autoconf which
is default.
E.g. :
iface eth0 inet6 static
pre-up echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/eth0/autoconf
address ...
Am Mittwoch, den 18.07.2012, 12:48 -0300 schrieb Carlos Ribas:
> Hello Simon,
>
>
>
> Yes, I''m using bridging. I put 126 as subnet mask because I
configured
> a P-P link. Unfortunately use 64 makes no difference. However, the
> command you said showed me that something is wrong:
>
>
> # ip -6 neigh
> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED
> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router
> STALE
>
>
> I was cheking only with this command (and looking at red line, I
> thought that it was all fine):
>
>
> # route -A inet6
> Kernel IPv6 routing table
> Destination Next Hop Flag Met Ref
> Use If
> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::4/126 :: Ue 256 0
> 4 eth0
> fe80::/64 :: U 256 0
> 0 eth0
> ::/0 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 UG 1 0
> 0 eth0
> ::/0 fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 UGDAe 1024 0
> 0 eth0
> ::/0 :: !n -1 1
> 73 lo
> ::1/128 :: Un 0 1
> 23 lo
> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6/128 :: Un 0 1
> 24 lo
> fe80::216:3eff:fee2:3f3d/128 :: Un 0 1
> 0 lo
> ff00::/8 :: U 256 0
> 0 eth0
> ::/0 :: !n -1 1
> 73 lo
>
>
> I will investigate further more. Do you think there are something
> wrong with "network-script" that can cause this? I hope not! :)
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> -------------------------------
> Carlos Eduardo Ribas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2012/7/18 Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>
>
> Carlos Ribas wrote:
>
>
> I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like
> to configure a dual stack for some services, such as
> DNS and Web Server.
>
> First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure
> IPv6 in Dom0? I''m not sure, but I dont think so,
since
> from Dom0 using loopback address I can ping the IPv6
> address from my router.
>
>
>
>
> You don''t need any address of Dom0 (I''m assuming
you are using
> bridging ?)
>
> I have one DomU running IPv6 for testing (DNS, Web server),
> Dom0 and the rest of the network is IPv4 only - well as much
> as you can when everything defaults to at least configuring
> link-local IPv6 addresses.
>
>
>
>
> # The primary network interface
> auto eth0
> iface eth0 inet static
> address 10.0.0.100
> gateway 10.0.0.1
> netmask 255.255.255.0
> broadcast 10.0.0.255
>
> iface eth0 inet6 static
> address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6
> netmask 126
> gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5
>
>
>
>
> That looks OK, I''m running a Hurricane Electric tunnel so
mine
> looks different.
>
>
>
>
> But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My
> routes seems to be OK. Should I configure something
> else? I was looking in google and saw some people
> saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, specially the
> line "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1", but this
dont
> did any difference.
>
>
>
>
> I have "post-up echo 1
> > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding" in the IPv6
stanza
> in my /etc/network/interfaces. But that is only needed to make
> the machine route packets between networks (ie act as a router
> for other devices'' traffic), it will still talk to other
> devices without this.
>
>
>
>
> (network-script ''network-bridge
antispoof=yes'')
> (vif-script vif-bridge)
>
>
>
>
> Standard advice now is not to use a network-script. It made
> sense a while back, but the scripts are deprecated and the
> host OS generally has better tools. For example, in Debian you
> can put something like this in /etc/network/interfaces :
> auto br0
> iface br0 inet static
> bridge_ports eth0
> address a.b.c.d
> netmask 255.255.255.0
>
> One things I suggest it might be worth looking at is your
> subnet mask. Try using 64 instead of 126 and see if it makes
> any difference. While technically a 126 bit netmask ought to
> work on a P-P link, in practice I believe there are a lot of
> things that break if you go less than 64 bits for the host
> part of the address.
>
> Also, "ip -6 neigh" will show you the known IPv6
neighbours
> (roughly equivalent to ARP cache for Ipv4). That may help in
> debugging.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
Hello Stephan,
I tried to use my subnet, but didnt work. I tried to disable autoconf,
no success. I also tried to manually configure the forward in Dom0 using
"ip6tables -A FORWARD -s 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 -m physdev --physdev-in vif21.0
-j ACCEPT" but once again, without success.
It''s odd because if I try to ping the router from my DomU, it will
not
work, and this is the output from "ip -6 neigh":
# ip -6 neigh
2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED
fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE
From my router I can''t ping my DomU, but then I got this message:
# ip -6 neigh
2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router REACHABLE
fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router REACHABLE
And then it changed to:
# ip -6 neigh
2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE
fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE
What seems to be ok, but it is not ok. Well, I''m still
investigating.
Thank you for your help,
-------------------------------
Carlos Eduardo Ribas
2012/7/19 Stephan Seitz <s.seitz@netzhaut.de>
> **
> Hi,
>
> as Simon already wrote, try to use your provisioned "regular"
ipv6 net.
> This is usally
> a /48 or /64.
>
> Our dom0 don''t have ipv6 configured in any way, it''s just
enabled by
> default.
> Only the usual local-link (fe80...) addresses are bound to the interfaces.
> If you''re using bridges (peth0 -> eth0 -> vifX.X), you
don''t have to touch
> any
> forwarding settings. It''s "just working".
>
> If you''re using fixed addresses, don''t forget to disable
autoconf which is
> default.
> E.g. :
> iface eth0 inet6 static
> pre-up echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/eth0/autoconf
> address ...
>
>
>
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 18.07.2012, 12:48 -0300 schrieb Carlos Ribas:
>
> Hello Simon,
>
>
>
> Yes, I''m using bridging. I put 126 as subnet mask because I
configured a
> P-P link. Unfortunately use 64 makes no difference. However, the command
> you said showed me that something is wrong:
>
>
>
> # ip -6 neigh
>
> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED
>
> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE
>
>
>
> I was cheking only with this command (and looking at red line, I thought
> that it was all fine):
>
>
>
> # route -A inet6
>
> Kernel IPv6 routing table
>
> Destination Next Hop Flag Met Ref
> Use If
>
> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::4/126 :: Ue 256 0
> 4 eth0
>
> fe80::/64 :: U 256 0
> 0 eth0
>
> *::/0 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 UG 1 0
> 0 eth0*
>
> ::/0 fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 UGDAe 1024 0
> 0 eth0
>
> ::/0 :: !n -1 1
> 73 lo
>
> ::1/128 :: Un 0 1
> 23 lo
>
> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6/128 :: Un 0 1
> 24 lo
>
> fe80::216:3eff:fee2:3f3d/128 :: Un 0 1
> 0 lo
>
> ff00::/8 :: U 256 0
> 0 eth0
>
> ::/0 :: !n -1 1
> 73 lo
>
>
>
> I will investigate further more. Do you think there are something wrong
> with "network-script" that can cause this? I hope not! :)
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Carlos Eduardo Ribas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2012/7/18 Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>
>
> Carlos Ribas wrote:
>
> I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like to configure a dual
> stack for some services, such as DNS and Web Server.
>
> First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure IPv6 in Dom0?
I''m
> not sure, but I dont think so, since from Dom0 using loopback address I can
> ping the IPv6 address from my router.
>
>
>
> You don''t need any address of Dom0 (I''m assuming you
are using bridging
> ?)
>
> I have one DomU running IPv6 for testing (DNS, Web server), Dom0 and the
> rest of the network is IPv4 only - well as much as you can when everything
> defaults to at least configuring link-local IPv6 addresses.
>
>
>
> # The primary network interface
> auto eth0
> iface eth0 inet static
> address 10.0.0.100
> gateway 10.0.0.1
> netmask 255.255.255.0
> broadcast 10.0.0.255
>
> iface eth0 inet6 static
> address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6
> netmask 126
> gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5
>
>
>
> That looks OK, I''m running a Hurricane Electric tunnel so mine
looks
> different.
>
>
>
> But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My routes seems to be
> OK. Should I configure something else? I was looking in google and saw some
> people saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, specially the line
> "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1", but this dont did any
difference.
>
>
>
> I have "post-up echo 1 >
/proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding" in the
> IPv6 stanza in my /etc/network/interfaces. But that is only needed to make
> the machine route packets between networks (ie act as a router for other
> devices'' traffic), it will still talk to other devices without
this.
>
>
>
> (network-script ''network-bridge antispoof=yes'')
> (vif-script vif-bridge)
>
>
>
> Standard advice now is not to use a network-script. It made sense a
> while back, but the scripts are deprecated and the host OS generally has
> better tools. For example, in Debian you can put something like this in
> /etc/network/interfaces :
> auto br0
> iface br0 inet static
> bridge_ports eth0
> address a.b.c.d
> netmask 255.255.255.0
>
> One things I suggest it might be worth looking at is your subnet mask. Try
> using 64 instead of 126 and see if it makes any difference. While
> technically a 126 bit netmask ought to work on a P-P link, in practice I
> believe there are a lot of things that break if you go less than 64 bits
> for the host part of the address.
>
> Also, "ip -6 neigh" will show you the known IPv6 neighbours
(roughly
> equivalent to ARP cache for Ipv4). That may help in debugging.
>
> _______________________________________________Xen-users mailing
listXen-users@lists.xen.orghttp://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
What let me crazy is that from Dom0 (with local-link) I can ping the router and from DomU with static IP I can''t! Dom0: # ping6 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 PING 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5(2001:xxxx:xxxx::5) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.56 ms ^C DomU: # ping6 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 PING 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5(2001:xxxx:xxxx::5) 56 data bytes ^C --- 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 3999ms Regards, ------------------------------- Carlos Eduardo Ribas 2012/7/19 Carlos Ribas <carlos@ansp.br>> Hello Stephan, > > I tried to use my subnet, but didnt work. I tried to disable autoconf, > no success. I also tried to manually configure the forward in Dom0 using > "ip6tables -A FORWARD -s 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 -m physdev --physdev-in vif21.0 > -j ACCEPT" but once again, without success. > > It''s odd because if I try to ping the router from my DomU, it will not > work, and this is the output from "ip -6 neigh": > > # ip -6 neigh > 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED > fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE > > From my router I can''t ping my DomU, but then I got this message: > > # ip -6 neigh > 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router REACHABLE > fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router REACHABLE > > And then it changed to: > > # ip -6 neigh > 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE > fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE > > What seems to be ok, but it is not ok. Well, I''m still investigating. > > Thank you for your help, > > ------------------------------- > Carlos Eduardo Ribas > > > > > > 2012/7/19 Stephan Seitz <s.seitz@netzhaut.de> > >> ** >> Hi, >> >> as Simon already wrote, try to use your provisioned "regular" ipv6 net. >> This is usally >> a /48 or /64. >> >> Our dom0 don''t have ipv6 configured in any way, it''s just enabled by >> default. >> Only the usual local-link (fe80...) addresses are bound to the interfaces. >> If you''re using bridges (peth0 -> eth0 -> vifX.X), you don''t have to >> touch any >> forwarding settings. It''s "just working". >> >> If you''re using fixed addresses, don''t forget to disable autoconf which >> is default. >> E.g. : >> iface eth0 inet6 static >> pre-up echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/eth0/autoconf >> address ... >> >> >> >> >> >> Am Mittwoch, den 18.07.2012, 12:48 -0300 schrieb Carlos Ribas: >> >> Hello Simon, >> >> >> >> Yes, I''m using bridging. I put 126 as subnet mask because I configured >> a P-P link. Unfortunately use 64 makes no difference. However, the command >> you said showed me that something is wrong: >> >> >> >> # ip -6 neigh >> >> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED >> >> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE >> >> >> >> I was cheking only with this command (and looking at red line, I >> thought that it was all fine): >> >> >> >> # route -A inet6 >> >> Kernel IPv6 routing table >> >> Destination Next Hop Flag Met Ref >> Use If >> >> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::4/126 :: Ue 256 0 >> 4 eth0 >> >> fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 >> 0 eth0 >> >> *::/0 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 UG 1 0 >> 0 eth0* >> >> ::/0 fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 UGDAe 1024 0 >> 0 eth0 >> >> ::/0 :: !n -1 1 >> 73 lo >> >> ::1/128 :: Un 0 1 >> 23 lo >> >> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6/128 :: Un 0 1 >> 24 lo >> >> fe80::216:3eff:fee2:3f3d/128 :: Un 0 1 >> 0 lo >> >> ff00::/8 :: U 256 0 >> 0 eth0 >> >> ::/0 :: !n -1 1 >> 73 lo >> >> >> >> I will investigate further more. Do you think there are something wrong >> with "network-script" that can cause this? I hope not! :) >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> Carlos Eduardo Ribas >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/7/18 Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk> >> >> Carlos Ribas wrote: >> >> I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like to configure a dual >> stack for some services, such as DNS and Web Server. >> >> First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure IPv6 in Dom0? I''m >> not sure, but I dont think so, since from Dom0 using loopback address I can >> ping the IPv6 address from my router. >> >> >> >> You don''t need any address of Dom0 (I''m assuming you are using >> bridging ?) >> >> I have one DomU running IPv6 for testing (DNS, Web server), Dom0 and the >> rest of the network is IPv4 only - well as much as you can when everything >> defaults to at least configuring link-local IPv6 addresses. >> >> >> >> # The primary network interface >> auto eth0 >> iface eth0 inet static >> address 10.0.0.100 >> gateway 10.0.0.1 >> netmask 255.255.255.0 >> broadcast 10.0.0.255 >> >> iface eth0 inet6 static >> address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 >> netmask 126 >> gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 >> >> >> >> That looks OK, I''m running a Hurricane Electric tunnel so mine looks >> different. >> >> >> >> But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My routes seems to be >> OK. Should I configure something else? I was looking in google and saw some >> people saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, specially the line >> "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1", but this dont did any difference. >> >> >> >> I have "post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding" in >> the IPv6 stanza in my /etc/network/interfaces. But that is only needed to >> make the machine route packets between networks (ie act as a router for >> other devices'' traffic), it will still talk to other devices without this. >> >> >> >> (network-script ''network-bridge antispoof=yes'') >> (vif-script vif-bridge) >> >> >> >> Standard advice now is not to use a network-script. It made sense a >> while back, but the scripts are deprecated and the host OS generally has >> better tools. For example, in Debian you can put something like this in >> /etc/network/interfaces : >> auto br0 >> iface br0 inet static >> bridge_ports eth0 >> address a.b.c.d >> netmask 255.255.255.0 >> >> One things I suggest it might be worth looking at is your subnet mask. >> Try using 64 instead of 126 and see if it makes any difference. While >> technically a 126 bit netmask ought to work on a P-P link, in practice I >> believe there are a lot of things that break if you go less than 64 bits >> for the host part of the address. >> >> Also, "ip -6 neigh" will show you the known IPv6 neighbours (roughly >> equivalent to ARP cache for Ipv4). That may help in debugging. >> >> _______________________________________________Xen-users mailing listXen-users@lists.xen.orghttp://lists.xen.org/xen-users >> >> >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
Can someone put here the output from the command "ip6tables -L -n" from Dom0? Thanks, ------------------------------- Carlos Eduardo Ribas 2012/7/19 Carlos Ribas <carlos@ansp.br>> What let me crazy is that from Dom0 (with local-link) I can ping the > router and from DomU with static IP I can''t! > > Dom0: > # ping6 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 > PING 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5(2001:xxxx:xxxx::5) 56 data bytes > 64 bytes from 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.56 ms > ^C > > DomU: > # ping6 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 > PING 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5(2001:xxxx:xxxx::5) 56 data bytes > ^C > --- 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 ping statistics --- > 5 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 3999ms > > Regards, > > ------------------------------- > Carlos Eduardo Ribas > > > > > > 2012/7/19 Carlos Ribas <carlos@ansp.br> > >> Hello Stephan, >> >> I tried to use my subnet, but didnt work. I tried to disable >> autoconf, no success. I also tried to manually configure the forward in >> Dom0 using "ip6tables -A FORWARD -s 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 -m physdev >> --physdev-in vif21.0 -j ACCEPT" but once again, without success. >> >> It''s odd because if I try to ping the router from my DomU, it will >> not work, and this is the output from "ip -6 neigh": >> >> # ip -6 neigh >> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED >> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE >> >> From my router I can''t ping my DomU, but then I got this message: >> >> # ip -6 neigh >> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router REACHABLE >> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router >> REACHABLE >> >> And then it changed to: >> >> # ip -6 neigh >> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE >> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE >> >> What seems to be ok, but it is not ok. Well, I''m still investigating. >> >> Thank you for your help, >> >> ------------------------------- >> Carlos Eduardo Ribas >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/7/19 Stephan Seitz <s.seitz@netzhaut.de> >> >>> ** >>> Hi, >>> >>> as Simon already wrote, try to use your provisioned "regular" ipv6 net. >>> This is usally >>> a /48 or /64. >>> >>> Our dom0 don''t have ipv6 configured in any way, it''s just enabled by >>> default. >>> Only the usual local-link (fe80...) addresses are bound to the >>> interfaces. >>> If you''re using bridges (peth0 -> eth0 -> vifX.X), you don''t have to >>> touch any >>> forwarding settings. It''s "just working". >>> >>> If you''re using fixed addresses, don''t forget to disable autoconf which >>> is default. >>> E.g. : >>> iface eth0 inet6 static >>> pre-up echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/eth0/autoconf >>> address ... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Am Mittwoch, den 18.07.2012, 12:48 -0300 schrieb Carlos Ribas: >>> >>> Hello Simon, >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes, I''m using bridging. I put 126 as subnet mask because I configured >>> a P-P link. Unfortunately use 64 makes no difference. However, the command >>> you said showed me that something is wrong: >>> >>> >>> >>> # ip -6 neigh >>> >>> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 dev eth0 FAILED >>> >>> fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 dev eth0 lladdr 00:24:38:c9:8b:00 router STALE >>> >>> >>> >>> I was cheking only with this command (and looking at red line, I >>> thought that it was all fine): >>> >>> >>> >>> # route -A inet6 >>> >>> Kernel IPv6 routing table >>> >>> Destination Next Hop Flag Met Ref >>> Use If >>> >>> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::4/126 :: Ue 256 0 >>> 4 eth0 >>> >>> fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 >>> 0 eth0 >>> >>> *::/0 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 UG 1 0 >>> 0 eth0* >>> >>> ::/0 fe80::224:38ff:fec9:8b00 UGDAe 1024 0 >>> 0 eth0 >>> >>> ::/0 :: !n -1 1 >>> 73 lo >>> >>> ::1/128 :: Un 0 1 >>> 23 lo >>> >>> 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6/128 :: Un 0 1 >>> 24 lo >>> >>> fe80::216:3eff:fee2:3f3d/128 :: Un 0 1 >>> 0 lo >>> >>> ff00::/8 :: U 256 0 >>> 0 eth0 >>> >>> ::/0 :: !n -1 1 >>> 73 lo >>> >>> >>> >>> I will investigate further more. Do you think there are something >>> wrong with "network-script" that can cause this? I hope not! :) >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> >>> Carlos Eduardo Ribas >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2012/7/18 Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk> >>> >>> Carlos Ribas wrote: >>> >>> I am trying to do some tests with IPv6. I would like to configure a >>> dual stack for some services, such as DNS and Web Server. >>> >>> First of all, to have IPv6 in DomU should I configure IPv6 in Dom0? I''m >>> not sure, but I dont think so, since from Dom0 using loopback address I can >>> ping the IPv6 address from my router. >>> >>> >>> >>> You don''t need any address of Dom0 (I''m assuming you are using >>> bridging ?) >>> >>> I have one DomU running IPv6 for testing (DNS, Web server), Dom0 and the >>> rest of the network is IPv4 only - well as much as you can when everything >>> defaults to at least configuring link-local IPv6 addresses. >>> >>> >>> >>> # The primary network interface >>> auto eth0 >>> iface eth0 inet static >>> address 10.0.0.100 >>> gateway 10.0.0.1 >>> netmask 255.255.255.0 >>> broadcast 10.0.0.255 >>> >>> iface eth0 inet6 static >>> address 2001:xxxx:xxxx::6 >>> netmask 126 >>> gateway 2001:xxxx:xxxx::5 >>> >>> >>> >>> That looks OK, I''m running a Hurricane Electric tunnel so mine looks >>> different. >>> >>> >>> >>> But I cant ping the IPv6 address from my gateway. My routes seems to be >>> OK. Should I configure something else? I was looking in google and saw some >>> people saying about to check /etc/sysctl.conf, specially the line >>> "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1", but this dont did any difference. >>> >>> >>> >>> I have "post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding" in >>> the IPv6 stanza in my /etc/network/interfaces. But that is only needed to >>> make the machine route packets between networks (ie act as a router for >>> other devices'' traffic), it will still talk to other devices without this. >>> >>> >>> >>> (network-script ''network-bridge antispoof=yes'') >>> (vif-script vif-bridge) >>> >>> >>> >>> Standard advice now is not to use a network-script. It made sense a >>> while back, but the scripts are deprecated and the host OS generally has >>> better tools. For example, in Debian you can put something like this in >>> /etc/network/interfaces : >>> auto br0 >>> iface br0 inet static >>> bridge_ports eth0 >>> address a.b.c.d >>> netmask 255.255.255.0 >>> >>> One things I suggest it might be worth looking at is your subnet mask. >>> Try using 64 instead of 126 and see if it makes any difference. While >>> technically a 126 bit netmask ought to work on a P-P link, in practice I >>> believe there are a lot of things that break if you go less than 64 bits >>> for the host part of the address. >>> >>> Also, "ip -6 neigh" will show you the known IPv6 neighbours (roughly >>> equivalent to ARP cache for Ipv4). That may help in debugging. >>> >>> _______________________________________________Xen-users mailing listXen-users@lists.xen.orghttp://lists.xen.org/xen-users >>> >>> >> >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
I dono if my problem is the same as yours, but I had a problem where the linux bridge was not passing multicast (x3:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx) packets. http://wiki.prgmr.com/mediawiki/index.php/20120626_troubleshooting_ipv6 #cat /sys/class/net/vif0.0/brport/multicast_router 1 # echo "2">/sys/class/net/vif0.0/brport/multicast_router essentially, I did this for all ports on the bridge, and it seemed to have worked. Sorry the documentation is absolutely horrible. I haven''t had time to sort it out and properly test it.