I have just got the following message from my hosting provider. I have put in XXXX and YYYY to replace some of the numbers. ip -6 addr add 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081::2/64 dev xenbr0 I ran the above command to assign the IP address. # ping6 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1 connect: Network is unreachable But ping6 fails in the above manner. What am I doing wrong? We have successfully setup the following IPv6 subnet for your server. IPs: 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081:: /64 Gateway: 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1 /59 Useable IP addresses: 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081::2 to 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
ip -6 addr add 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081::2/64 dev xenbr0 ip route add 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1/59 dev xenbr0 ip route add default via 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1 Hetzner (my hosting company) sent me an unsolicited information email about my new IP addresses. It had a link to the English version of their Wiki about this which happened to be a non-existent page. With the help of Google Translation on their German Wiki page I got the above commands to work. It seems that my mistake was that I didn't realise that you can create a host route on an IPv6 enabled interface without having a local address in the subnet. Once I added that route (the second line) then the third line was obvious and everything works well. My next task will be to assign public IPv6 addresses to a bunch of DomUs to save the expense of buying them public IPv4 addresses. On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> wrote:
I have just got the following message from my hosting provider. I have put in XXXX and YYYY to replace some of the numbers.
ip -6 addr add 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081::2/64 dev xenbr0
I ran the above command to assign the IP address.
# ping6 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1 connect: Network is unreachable
But ping6 fails in the above manner. What am I doing wrong?
We have successfully setup the following IPv6 subnet for your server.
IPs: 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081:: /64
Gateway: 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1 /59
Useable IP addresses: 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081::2 to 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff
-- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
ip -6 addr add 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9081::2/64 dev xenbr0 ip route add 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1/59 dev xenbr0 ip route add default via 2a01:XXXX:YYYY:9080::1
Hetzner (my hosting company) sent me an unsolicited information email about my new IP addresses. It had a link to the English version of
their Wiki
about this which happened to be a non-existent page. With the help of Google Translation on their German Wiki page I got the above commands to work.
It seems that my mistake was that I didn't realise that you can create a host route on an IPv6 enabled interface without having a local address in the subnet. Once I added that route (the second line) then the third line was obvious and everything works well.
My next task will be to assign public IPv6 addresses to a bunch of DomUs to save the expense of buying them public IPv4 addresses.
Good to hear you have it working! What distribution are you using? Last time I tried using the IPv6 stuff in /etc/network/interfaces under Debian it was an exercise in frustration. It treated the IPv6 as a separate interface, which is (IMHO) very stupid as it meant that all the bridge and vlan commands tried to do their thing in both interfaces with hilarious results. That was around 5 years ago now though I think... but I've just stuck with 'ip -6 addr add' commands in each interface since then. If only it was as easy as Windows. James
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, "James Harper" <james.harper@bendigoit.com.au> wrote:
What distribution are you using? Last time I tried using the IPv6 stuff in /etc/network/interfaces under Debian it was an exercise in frustration. It treated the IPv6 as a separate interface, which is (IMHO) very stupid as it meant that all the bridge and vlan commands tried to do their thing in both interfaces with hilarious results. That was around 5 years ago now though I think... but I've just stuck with 'ip -6 addr add' commands in each interface since then.
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
On 25/11/11 8:08 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, "James Harper" <james.harper@bendigoit.com.au> wrote:
What distribution are you using? Last time I tried using the IPv6 stuff in /etc/network/interfaces under Debian it was an exercise in frustration. It treated the IPv6 as a separate interface, which is (IMHO) very stupid as it meant that all the bridge and vlan commands tried to do their thing in both interfaces with hilarious results. That was around 5 years ago now though I think... but I've just stuck with 'ip -6 addr add' commands in each interface since then. It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
/etc/network/interfaces ---- auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address x.x.x.242 netmask 255.255.255.192 gateway x.x.x.254 iface eth0 inet6 static address x:4200:401:10::3 netmask 64 gateway x:4200:401:10::1 ---- The above works. Mike
On 25/11/11 8:08 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, "James Harper" <james.harper@bendigoit.com.au> wrote:
What distribution are you using? Last time I tried using the IPv6 stuff in /etc/network/interfaces under Debian it was an exercise in frustration. It treated the IPv6 as a separate interface, which is (IMHO) very stupid as it meant that all the bridge and vlan
commands
tried to do their thing in both interfaces with hilarious results. That was around 5 years ago now though I think... but I've just stuck with 'ip -6 addr add' commands in each interface since then. It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
/etc/network/interfaces ---- auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address x.x.x.242 netmask 255.255.255.192 gateway x.x.x.254
iface eth0 inet6 static address x:4200:401:10::3 netmask 64 gateway x:4200:401:10::1
Maybe it works these days, but last time I tried it it didn't if your interface was a vlan interface (eg eth0.42), or a bridge. Or if you wanted any up or down commands. Frankly the idea of treating them as separate interfaces when they aren't is just dumb, and leads to all sorts of problems. James
Mike O'Connor wrote:
auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address x.x.x.242 netmask 255.255.255.192 gateway x.x.x.254
iface eth0 inet6 static address x:4200:401:10::3 netmask 64 gateway x:4200:401:10::1
This style also works; personally I find it prettier; IPv6 equivalent should be straightforward. (I'm sick of ifupdown's hokey old noweb codebase.) allow-auto lo dmz iface lo inet loopback # Until I think of a better place, add blackhole routes when the # loopback interface comes up. These ensure (unused) private IP # ranges aren't accidentally sent to the internet. Note that even # without this, Internode filters outbound packets to private IPs. up ip route add blackhole 10/8 up ip route add blackhole 172.16/12 up ip route add blackhole 192.168/16 up ip route add blackhole 169.254/16 up ip route add blackhole 203.7.155/24 down ip route flush type blackhole iface dmz inet manual up ip link set dev $IFACE up up ip address add dev $IFACE brd + 203.7.155.1/26 #up ip address add dev $IFACE brd + 203.7.155.2/26 # was satay #up ip address add dev $IFACE brd + 203.7.155.9/26 # was teriyaki up ip address add dev $IFACE brd + 203.7.155.19/26 # was soy up ip address add dev $IFACE brd + 203.7.155.20/26 # was office nat down ip address flush dev $IFACE down ip link set dev $IFACE down
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows. :-) If you find that google translate doesn't cut it, then I might be able to help with some translation from German. (Can't swear to be up to date on all the technical jargon, but 18 years at Siemens have pushed the vocabulary a little toward the technical. Also, I'm more often on-line in the evenings than during the day.) Good to hear that it's going now. Erik ¹ Then almost anything is for one who has never worked with M$. -- Microsoft is to software what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking. -- Bram Moolenaar
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows.
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as being easy? Sheesh.
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows.
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as being easy? Sheesh.
This old dog finds them hard to learn, mostly because they are difficult to navigate (I suppose anything is, the first time.) There doesn't seem to be anything to hold onto to remember the fix for next time, as compared to a command line invocation, which does stick. Or can succinctly be recorded in extracranial memory, for when the wetware starts showing bad blocks, with age. Ease is relative. Nearly forty years now¹, poking keys at the command line, does make that direct-access-to-everything interface easier for most things, than scurrying up and down menus in a graphical maze. Where content is graphical, as in schematic capture, PCB layout, and even a web browser, I'll spend the weeks to master the interface specific to that application. But not for sysadmin, programming tools, editors, etc. A quarter of a century spent as a coder makes text easier to grok. Erik ¹ Counting those uni days, hammering at an ASR33. The Hollerith card punch wasn't on-line command line, but similar mind-think. -- Habit is habit, and not to be flung out of the window by any man, but coaxed down-stairs a step at a time. - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar
Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> wrote:
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows.
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as being easy? Sheesh.
This old dog finds them hard to learn, mostly because they are difficult to navigate (I suppose anything is, the first time.) There doesn't seem to be anything to hold onto to remember the fix for next time, as compared to a command line invocation, which does stick. Or can succinctly be recorded in extracranial memory, for when the wetware starts showing bad blocks, with age.
It's the same for me, even when the GUI is accessible non-visually: I just find language easier to remember, faster to type and when I don't know/can't remember, searching a manual page or configuration file is usually fast enough.
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 08:25:09PM +1100, Jason White wrote:
Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> wrote:
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier?? than MSWindows.
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn???t count as being easy? Sheesh.
This old dog finds them hard to learn, mostly because they are difficult to navigate (I suppose anything is, the first time.) There doesn't seem to be anything to hold onto to remember the fix for next time, as compared to a command line invocation, which does stick. Or can succinctly be recorded in extracranial memory, for when the wetware starts showing bad blocks, with age.
It's the same for me, even when the GUI is accessible non-visually: I just find language easier to remember, faster to type and when I don't know/can't remember, searching a manual page or configuration file is usually fast enough.
+1 from me. I have a "lines" file stuffed full of command lines I've found useful in the past to accomplish some task or other. Beats the hell out of any GUI I've ever encountered, Cheers ... Duncan.
Jason White wrote:
Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> wrote:
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows.
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as being easy? Sheesh.
This old dog finds them hard to learn, mostly because they are difficult to navigate (I suppose anything is, the first time.) There doesn't seem to be anything to hold onto to remember the fix for next time, as compared to a command line invocation, which does stick. Or can succinctly be recorded in extracranial memory, for when the wetware starts showing bad blocks, with age.
It's the same for me, even when the GUI is accessible non-visually: I just find language easier to remember, faster to type and when I don't know/can't remember, searching a manual page or configuration file is usually fast enough.
A friend of mine once said: I didn't spend years of primary school learning to read and write, simply to go through life interacting with devices by pointing and grunting like a caveman.
participants (8)
-
Duncan Roe -
Erik Christiansen -
James Harper -
Jason White -
Jeremy Visser -
Mike O'Connor -
Russell Coker -
Trent W. Buck