On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 01:55:54PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
On 23 May 2020, at 8:44 am, Christopher Zimmermann wrote:
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 01:32:17PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2020/01/19 00:11, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
chr...@openbsd.org(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.18 06:18:
> On 23 May 2020, at 8:44 am, Christopher Zimmermann wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 01:32:17PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> On 2020/01/19 00:11, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
>>> chr...@openbsd.org(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.18 06:18:21 +0100:
>>> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:47:28PM +0
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 01:32:17PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2020/01/19 00:11, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
chr...@openbsd.org(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.18 06:18:21 +0100:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:47:28PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> >Christopher Zimmermann(chr...@openbsd.org) on
On 2020/01/19 00:11, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> chr...@openbsd.org(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.18 06:18:21 +0100:
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:47:28PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> > >Christopher Zimmermann(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.15 11:55:43 +0100:
> > >>Hi,
> > >>
> > >>as far as I
chr...@openbsd.org(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.18 06:18:21 +0100:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:47:28PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> >Christopher Zimmermann(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.15 11:55:43 +0100:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>as far as I can see a dual stack carp interface does not care whether
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 01:45:18PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2020/01/18 06:18, chr...@openbsd.org wrote:
> > Anyway, my main concern indeed is the broadcast noise generated by carp and
> > I would be equally happy if we had a ``carppeer6`` option. Would that be
> > considered?
>
> Adding
On 2020/01/18 06:18, chr...@openbsd.org wrote:
> Anyway, my main concern indeed is the broadcast noise generated by carp and
> I would be equally happy if we had a ``carppeer6`` option. Would that be
> considered?
Adding carppeer6 seems a better/safer approach.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 06:18:21AM +0100, chr...@openbsd.org wrote:
> Anyway, my main concern indeed is the broadcast noise generated by carp and
> I would be equally happy if we had a ``carppeer6`` option. Would that be
> considered?
I could make use of carppeer6, too.
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:47:28PM +0100, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
Christopher Zimmermann(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.15 11:55:43 +0100:
Hi,
as far as I can see a dual stack carp interface does not care whether it
receives advertisements addressed to IPv4 or IPv6. Any one will do.
So I propos
On 2020/01/15 12:04, Janne Johansson wrote:
> Den ons 15 jan. 2020 kl 11:57 skrev Christopher Zimmermann <
> chr...@openbsd.org>:
>
> > So I propose to send IPv6 advertisements only when IPv4 is not possible.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > - Noise can be reduced by using unicast advertisements.
> >This
Christopher Zimmermann(chr...@openbsd.org) on 2020.01.15 11:55:43 +0100:
> Hi,
>
> as far as I can see a dual stack carp interface does not care whether it
> receives advertisements addressed to IPv4 or IPv6. Any one will do.
> So I propose to send IPv6 advertisements only when IPv4 is not possib
On January 15, 2020 12:04:56 PM GMT+01:00, Janne Johansson
wrote:
>Den ons 15 jan. 2020 kl 11:57 skrev Christopher Zimmermann <
>chr...@openbsd.org>:
>
>> So I propose to send IPv6 advertisements only when IPv4 is not
>possible.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> - Noise can be reduced by using unicast advertis
Den ons 15 jan. 2020 kl 11:57 skrev Christopher Zimmermann <
chr...@openbsd.org>:
> So I propose to send IPv6 advertisements only when IPv4 is not possible.
>
> Why?
>
> - Noise can be reduced by using unicast advertisements.
>This is only possible for IPv4 by ``ifconfig carppeer``.
>I don
Hi,
as far as I can see a dual stack carp interface does not care whether it
receives advertisements addressed to IPv4 or IPv6. Any one will do.
So I propose to send IPv6 advertisements only when IPv4 is not possible.
Why?
- Noise can be reduced by using unicast advertisements.
This is only
14 matches
Mail list logo