Patrik Lahti
|
Re: ping6 of link-local address failure under dual-ip configuration
|
Patrik Lahti
08/28/2009 1:06 PM
post36887
|
Re: ping6 of link-local address failure under dual-ip configuration
Hi again,
Which version of QNX are you using? I'm using 6.4.1.
I can't ping6 a link-local address without specifying the interface
using -I option. This is really expected since link-local addresses have
link-local scope and as such only have a meaning when presented in
conjunction with a link (interface) to specify its scope. If I don't
specify the interface I get the error:
ping6: UDP connect: No route to host
Did you see that error message? Can you try specify the -I option to ping6?
Do you see any difference in statistics between the two scenarios? (see
e.g. netstat -p ip6/icmp6)
I note in scenario1_info.txt that the routing table seems cut off, is
there any more relevant info there?
Cheers!
/P
maurice gibbs wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have a test failing on my io-pkt stack. This test can be explained
> with 2 scenarios:
>
>
>
> Scenario 1: io-pkt stack configured with one IPv4 address and one IPv6
> address.
>
> Scenario 2: io-pkt stack configured with one IPv6 address
>
>
>
> In scenario 1, ping6 fails on the link-local address assigned to the
> stack. However, ping6 on the link-local address assigned to the stack
> succeeds in scenario 2.
>
>
>
>
>
> I have attached 2 files with the details of the scripts I use for both
> the scenarios. Note the following points about the scenarios:
>
>
>
> * A private VLAN (192.168.1.1) exists in both scenarios - it is
> not included in the configuration scripts since I don't "think" it plays
> an issue.
> * ping works for all IPv4 network address in scenario1 (e.g. this
> is specifically a ping6 problem with the IPv6 link-local address)
> * ping6 works for the IPv6 address I assigned in scenario1 (e.g.
> this is specifically a ping6 problem with the IPv6 link-local address)
>
>
>
>
>
> Questions:
>
>
>
> 1. Is my configuration script for the dual IP scenario correct? If
> not, what adjustments need to be made?
> 2. If the configuration script is correct, does scenario 1 work for
> anyone else?
> 3. If the configuration script is correct, does scenario 1 work for
> QNX 6.3.2 using IO-NET? Does it work for QNX 6.4.1 using IO-PKT?
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> maurice
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Maurice Gibbs
>
>
>
> Software Designer
>
> CommTest WaveReady BU
>
> JDS Uniphase Corp.
>
> 613.843.2326
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Technology
> http://community.qnx.com/sf/go/post36879
>
|
|
|
Sean Boudreau(deleted)
|
Re: ping6 of link-local address failure under dual-ip configuration
|
Sean Boudreau(deleted)
08/28/2009 2:54 PM
post36898
|
Re: ping6 of link-local address failure under dual-ip configuration
The difference appears to be the route flush. You'll
need to re-add the link local route(s). Something
like:
# route add -inet6 fe80::1%lo0 -iface fe80::1%lo0 -llinfo
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 11:36:56AM -0400, maurice gibbs wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have a test failing on my io-pkt stack. This test can be explained
> with 2 scenarios:
>
>
>
> Scenario 1: io-pkt stack configured with one IPv4 address and one IPv6
> address.
>
> Scenario 2: io-pkt stack configured with one IPv6 address
>
>
>
> In scenario 1, ping6 fails on the link-local address assigned to the
> stack. However, ping6 on the link-local address assigned to the stack
> succeeds in scenario 2.
>
>
>
>
>
> I have attached 2 files with the details of the scripts I use for both
> the scenarios. Note the following points about the scenarios:
>
>
>
> * A private VLAN (192.168.1.1) exists in both scenarios - it is
> not included in the configuration scripts since I don't "think" it plays
> an issue.
> * ping works for all IPv4 network address in scenario1 (e.g. this
> is specifically a ping6 problem with the IPv6 link-local address)
> * ping6 works for the IPv6 address I assigned in scenario1 (e.g.
> this is specifically a ping6 problem with the IPv6 link-local address)
>
>
>
>
>
> Questions:
>
>
>
> 1. Is my configuration script for the dual IP scenario correct? If
> not, what adjustments need to be made?
> 2. If the configuration script is correct, does scenario 1 work for
> anyone else?
> 3. If the configuration script is correct, does scenario 1 work for
> QNX 6.3.2 using IO-NET? Does it work for QNX 6.4.1 using IO-PKT?
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> maurice
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Maurice Gibbs
>
>
>
> Software Designer
>
> CommTest WaveReady BU
>
> JDS Uniphase Corp.
>
> 613.843.2326
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Technology
> http://community.qnx.com/sf/go/post36879
Content-Description: Sourceforge Attachment
>
> ====================
> Configuration Script
> ====================
>
> io-pkt-v6-hc -dppc405 mac=00019c000477,deviceindex=0,pmme
> waitfor /dev/io-net/en0
>
> ifconfig en0 inet6 2200::a0d:9903 prefixlen 64
> route -q add -inet6 default 2200::a0d:9901
>
>
>
> ========================
> Run-time Check on Config
> ========================
>
> # ifconfig
> lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 33192
> inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
> inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
> inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
> en0: flags=80008843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST,SHIM> mtu 1500
> address: 00:01:9c:00:04:77
> inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 192.168.255.255
> inet6 2200::a0d:9903 prefixlen 64
> inet6 fe80::201:9cff:fe00:477%en0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
>
> Process 368692 (ifconfig) exited status=0.
> #
> #
> # route show
> Routing tables
>
> Internet:
> Destination Gateway Flags
> 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH
> 192.168.0.0/16 link#2 U
>
> Internet6:
> Destination Gateway Flags
> :: 2200::a0d:9901 UG
> ::1 ::1 UH
> 2200:: link#2 U
> 2200::a0d:9901 00:24:c4:eb:10:35 UHL
> 2200::a0d:9903 00:01:9c:00:04:77 UHL
> fe80::%lo0 fe80::1%lo0 ...
View Full Message
|
|
|