I have a patch ready, which will be committed as soon as it is approved by the release team. --Qing > -----Original Message----- > From: Bjoern A. Zeeb [mailto:bzeeb-lists_at_lists.zabbadoz.net] > Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 10:45 PM > To: Li, Qing > Cc: FreeBSD Current; Qing Li > Subject: RE: Problem with latest HEAD and IPv6: in6_ifinit: insertion > failed > > On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Li, Qing wrote: > > >> > >> I then changed the script to s,fxp0,em1,g s,::1,::2,g and re-run: > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > >> - > >> dut# sh test.sh > >> 2001:db8::1 0:e0:81:81:13:ad fxp0 permanent R > >> 2001:db8::1 2001:db8::1 UH fxp0 > >> em1: flags=8802<BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 > >> ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists > >> 2001:db8::1 0:e0:81:81:13:ad fxp0 permanent R > >> 2001:db8::2 0:e0:81:81:13:9d em1 permanent R > >> 2001:db8::1 2001:db8::1 UH fxp0 > >> 2001:db8::2 2001:db8::2 UH em1 > >> em1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu > > 1500 > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > > > > > Your output appears to come from either an outdated in6.c > > or a custom version. I expect to see something like the > > following for each interface address from netstat output: > > > > Destination Gateway Flags Netif > > expire > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > 2001:db8::1 link#1 UHS lo0 > > 2001:db8::2 link#2 UHS lo0 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > Yes I would as well, unless something bad happens(tm). > > > Please verify your source file. > > bz_at_dut:/dut/bz/HEAD.svn% ident sys/netinet6/in6.c > sys/netinet6/in6.c: > $KAME: in6.c,v 1.259 2002/01/21 11:37:50 keiichi Exp $ > $FreeBSD: head/sys/netinet6/in6.c 196019 2009-08-01 19:26:27Z > rwatson $ > bz_at_dut:/dut/bz/HEAD.svn% svn status sys/netinet6/in6.c > bz_at_dut:/dut/bz/HEAD.svn% > > And as you can see the IFF_POINTOPOINT from your last commit are not > there > anymore: > > 1193 /* > 1194 * Remove the loopback route to the interface address. > 1195 * The check for the current setting of > "nd6_useloopback" is not needed. > 1196 */ > 1197 if (!(ia->ia_ifp->if_flags & IFF_LOOPBACK)) { > > 1776 /* > 1777 * add a loopback route to self > 1778 */ > 1779 if (V_nd6_useloopback && !(ifp->if_flags & > IFF_LOOPBACK)) { > > > /bz > > -- > Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one.Received on Tue Aug 04 2009 - 21:29:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:53 UTC