ipv6 autoconfiguration doesn't work anymore

Bug #78248 reported by Laurent Bigonville
14
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
linux-source-2.6.20 (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
Medium
Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: linux-image-2.6.20-5-lowlatency

ipv6 autoconfiguration doesn't work anymore with linux-image-2.6.20-5-lowlatency (2.6.20-5.7).

Works perfectly with linux-image-2.6.20-4-lowlatency (2.6.20-4.6)

Tags: ipv6
Revision history for this message
Ben Collins (ben-collins) wrote :

What about with 2.6.20-5-generic?

Changed in linux-source-2.6.20:
status: Unconfirmed → Needs Info
Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :

Yep same problem with 2.6.20-5-generic

Revision history for this message
Ben Collins (ben-collins) wrote :

Please attach via the web interface (do not paste into comments) the output of "lsmod" and "dmesg", in separate, uncompressed files.

Thanks

Changed in linux-source-2.6.20:
importance: Undecided → Medium
Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Ben Collins (ben-collins) wrote :

Well, ipv6 is loaded and there doesn't appear to be any problems with it related to the kernel. The ipv6 automatic setup was normally done via scripts. This behavior may have changed on purpose, or because of a bug in userspace.

I'm not sure what package(s) affect this, so retarget to this package once you find out.

Changed in linux-source-2.6.20:
status: Needs Info → Rejected
Revision history for this message
Fabio Massimo Di Nitto (fabbione) wrote :

ipv6 autoconf is done at kernel level. Userspace is not involved. I will try to setup a test environment here and let you know. At the moment i am out of vlans for this test.

Fabio

Changed in linux-source-2.6.20:
status: Rejected → Needs Info
Revision history for this message
Fabio Massimo Di Nitto (fabbione) wrote :

What RA software are you using on the router? It will be intersting to have as many details of the setup as possible so that we can reproduce the case.

FAbio

Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :

I'm using radvd (1.0-1) from debian etch

I just have a look with wireshark and I see router advertisements being sent

Revision history for this message
Mark Schouten (mark-prevented) wrote :

As can be seen in the duplicate bug, #80279, advertisements are being sent.

root@highway:/proc/sys/net/ipv6# tcpdump -i eth1 -vvv -s 512 ip6
tcpdump: listening on eth1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 512 bytes
18:34:36.919252 IP6 (hlim 255, next-header: ICMPv6 (58), length: 56) fe80::201:80ff:fe5f:9b4a > ip6-allnodes: [icmp6 sum ok] ICMP6, router advertisement, length 56
        hop limit 64, Flags [none], pref medium, router lifetime 1800s, reachable time 0s, retrans time 0s
          source link-address option (1), length 8 (1): 00:07:e9:0f:d3:aa
            0x0000: 0007 e90f d3aa
          prefix info option (3), length 32 (4): 2001:7b8:3:1000::/64, Flags [onlink, auto], valid time 2592000s, pref. time 604800s
            0x0000: 40c0 0027 8d00 0009 3a80 0000 0000 2001
            0x0010: 07b8 0003 1000 0000 0000 0000 0000

Also, not IPv6 is broken. Only the processing of RA.

Revision history for this message
Mark Schouten (mark-prevented) wrote :

This bug is very annoying for people actively using IPv6. Although IPv6 is not really mainstream (yet), it would help if the development part of the community would supply sufficient means to let it become mainstream.

Please let users know what more info you need to get this fixed. I will try to supply you with information.

Revision history for this message
Martijn vdS (martijn) wrote :

I have the same problem here, on 2.6.20-5-generic on i386.

Revision history for this message
Mark Schouten (mark-prevented) wrote :

There seems to be a fix:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/17/163 .

Patch can be found here:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg22663.html

Please implement this ASAP.

Revision history for this message
Mark Schouten (mark-prevented) wrote :

This bug is confirmed multiple times. A solution seems to be at hand.

Changed in linux-source-2.6.20:
status: Needs Info → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :

Fixed in linux-image-2.6.20-6

Could someone confirm?

Revision history for this message
Mark Schouten (mark-prevented) wrote :

pingmark@sandra:~$ ping6 -c1 highway.office.bit.nl
PING highway.office.bit.nl(highway.office.bit.nl) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from highway.office.bit.nl: icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=11.8 ms

--- highway.office.bit.nl ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 11.803/11.803/11.803/0.000 ms

marks@highway:~$ uname -a
Linux highway.office.bit.nl 2.6.20-6-generic #2 SMP Tue Jan 30 21:55:16 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux
marks@highway:~$ ip -6 addr list
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,10000> mtu 16436
    inet6 ::1/128 scope host
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,10000> mtu 1500 qlen 1000
    inet6 2001:7b8:3:1000:202:b3ff:fe10:dbda/64 scope global dynamic
       valid_lft 2591855sec preferred_lft 604655sec
    inet6 fe80::202:b3ff:fe10:dbda/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

Works like a charme!

Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :

Fixed

Changed in linux-source-2.6.20:
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.