Linux and ULA support and default route
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at massar.ch
Thu Oct 13 08:21:48 CEST 2016
On 2016-10-13 02:30, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Hi Jeroen,
> On 13/10/2016 12:16, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> On 2016-10-13 00:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> [..]
>>> Kernel IPv6 routing table
>>> Destination Next Hop Flag Met Ref Use If
>>> fd00::/64 fe80::be05:43ff:fe8e:ce39 UG 600 1 12 wlp2s0
>>> fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 wlp2s0
>>> ::/0 :: !n -1 1 137 lo
>>> ::1/128 :: Un 0 3 7 lo
>>> fd00::c5bb:40f2:f3d5:94e4/128 :: Un 0 3 19 lo
>>> fe80::9051:543a:4c9e:e93e/128 :: Un 0 2 11 lo
>>> ff00::/8 :: U 256 2 1763 wlp2s0
>>> ::/0 :: !n -1 1 137 lo
>>
>> Do you receive those prefixes over RA or manual config?
>
> RA of course
>
>> Is forwarding enabled?
>
> No
>
>> What does the ra_accept sysctl say?
>
> accept_ra = 1
>
>>
>> Also 'ip -6 ro get <prefix>' can be very useful to check where the
>> routing table thinks packets are supposed to go.
>
> Well, once I create the default route it tells me exactly what it should,
> for any global-scope address. But after reboot it says "unreachable"
> for any address outside the ULA /64 (i.e. even the rest of the ULA /48
> is unreachable).
RA's only install the /64 and when default announced a default.
Thus 'the rest of the ULA /48' would require a default route to be
installed to reach that...
When the device does not install a default route, there won't be an
entry for anything in that /48, just the /64 and thus that space won't
be reachable.
Btw: IMHO ULAs are in 99% of the cases the wrong thing to use anyway.
But note, this is not specific to ULA at all. (Except maybe that your
device chose to not push a default route, as there is no default route
to the Internet).
You might want to check with tcpdump with the exact details of the RA are.
Greets,
Jeroen
More information about the ipv6-ops
mailing list