25 Nov
2011
25 Nov
'11
7:14 p.m.
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/
25 Nov
25 Nov
7:34 p.m.
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(a)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/
8:15 p.m.
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
8:38 p.m.
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, "James Harper" <james.harper(a)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/
9:21 p.m.
On 25/11/11 8:08 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, "James Harper"
<james.harper(a)bendigoit.com.au> wrote:
/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
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.
10:11 p.m.
On 25/11/11 8:08 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
commands
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011, "James Harper"
<james.harper(a)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 >> 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.
27 Nov
27 Nov
10:48 a.m.
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 $IFACE down
25 Nov
25 Nov
9:28 p.m.
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
It's Debian. I just put the ip and route commands on "up" lines in
/etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows. :-)
If you find that google translate doesn't cut it, then I might be able
to help with some translation from German. (Can't swear to be up to date
on all the technical jargon, but 18 years at Siemens have pushed the
vocabulary a little toward the technical. Also, I'm more often on-line in
the evenings than during the day.)
Good to hear that it's going now.
Erik
¹ Then almost anything is for one who has never worked with M$.
--
Microsoft is to software what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking.
-- Bram Moolenaar
26 Nov
26 Nov
12:40 p.m.
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as
being easy? Sheesh.
> It's Debian. I just put the ip and
route commands on "up" lines in
> /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows.
7:56 p.m.
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
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
On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as
being easy? Sheesh. > It's Debian. I just put the ip and
route commands on "up" lines in
> /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows. 
8:25 p.m.
Erik Christiansen <dvalin(a)internode.on.net> wrote:
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
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.
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
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. On 25.11.11 20:38, Russell Coker wrote:
Having a point-and-drool GUI interface to do the job doesn’t count as
being easy? Sheesh. > It's Debian. I just put the ip and
route commands on "up" lines in
> /etc/network/interfaces.
That sounds easier¹ than MSWindows. 
10:08 p.m.
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 08:25:09PM +1100, Jason White wrote:
Erik Christiansen <dvalin(a)internode.on.net>
wrote:
+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.
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
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.
Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
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. 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.
27 Nov
27 Nov
10:52 a.m.
Jason White wrote:
Erik Christiansen <dvalin(a)internode.on.net>
wrote:
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.
On 26.11.11 12:40, Jeremy Visser wrote:
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. Thus spake Erik Christiansen:
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. 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.
4142
days inactive
4143
days old
12 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Duncan Roe -
Erik Christiansen -
James Harper -
Jason White -
Jeremy Visser -
Mike O'Connor -
Russell Coker -
Trent W. Buck