martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Simon Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.12.09.1458 +0100]:
# brctl addbr br1
# ip addr add 2001:41e0:ff38:ffff::2/64 dev br1
# ip link set br1 up
# ip addr show
.
.
.
8: br1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state
UNKNOWN
link/ether 0a:f2:4c:5f:bc:81 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet6 2001:41e0:ff38:ffff::2/64 scope global tentative
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
inet6 fe80::8f2:4cff:fe5f:bc81/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
strace dnsmasq ....
bind(6, {sa_family=AF_INET6, sin6_port=htons(53), inet_pton(AF_INET6,
"2001:41e0:ff38:ffff::2", &sin6_addr), sin6_flowinfo=0,
sin6_scope_id=8}, 28) = -1 EADDRNOTAVAIL (Cannot assign requested
address)
Yes, I got the same, using the above sequence of steps and this
command line:
strace -fo /tmp/dnsmasq.strace dnsmasq --no-daemon --conf-file
--bind-interfaces --listen-address=172.23.0.1
--listen-address=2001:41e0:ff38:ffff::2 --except-interface=lo
--strict-order --pid-file=/var/run/dnsmasq.vnet.pid
--dhcp-range=172.23.0.32,172.23.0.254,12h
--dhcp-leasefile=/var/lib/misc/dnsmasq.vnet.leases
--dhcp-authoritative
Since you did not assign the IPv4 address in the above, and I didn't
either, IPv4 wasn't bound either, which was expected.
I think, in my case, the problem is that the "tentative" flag is set on
that address. I have no idea how that happened, but adding new addresses
to the same interface doesn't set the tentative flag and doesn't see the
error on bind().
Are you seeing that too?
I'm out beyond my IPv6 comfort zone here: Is it possible to take this
somewhere where IPv6 experts hang out?
Simon.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
