Re: 6to4 problem
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:09:13AM +0300, Laitinen Ismo wrote:
> > ping6:
> >
> > 08:49:33.274608 e272.w3.ton.tut.fi > 192.88.99.1: 2002:c1a6:5c4e::1 >
> > apple.kame.net: icmp6: echo request (encap)
> > 08:49:33.592821 kddilab.6to4.jp > e272.w3.ton.tut.fi: apple.kame.net >
> > 2002:c1a6:5c4e::1: icmp6: echo reply (encap)
> >
> > What might cause that? Something between eth0 and tunnel?
>
> the encap mean, that it is still inside the ipv4 encapsulation. The tunnel
> does not have matched in that case. I guess this is due to the fact, that it
> needs to be set up with a remote "any" :)
Okay, that explains it. So the howto is correct after all?
Following is from howto and it has worked before and now gives that
RTNETLINK error on last line.
ip tunnel add tun6to4 mode sit remote any local 193.166.92.78
ip link set dev tun6to4 up
ip -6 addr add 2002:c1a6:5c4e::1/16 dev tun6to4
ip -6 route add 2000::/3 via ::192.88.99.1 dev tun6to4 metric 1
> BTW: instead of using 6to4 auto mapping you can slso use a direct tunnel to
> a 6bone site. You could try www.freenet6.net
Yes, I looked into that possibility some time ago but I got an impression
that freenet6 tunnel endpoints are in Canada. Of course there are some
tunnel brokers here in Europe. But having a 6to4 relay just a
kilometer away makes it more intresting. 6to4 is also more flexible
for testing purposes. But I think that static tunnel might be
easier to set up.
It is funny how difficult this 6to4 setup is even if this is quite normal
case (one ipv4 address, directly connected). It used to work fine but now
it does not.
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
* Ismo Laitinen | "Thinking computer... *
*Tampere University of Technology| ...you mean like *
* laitinei@cs.tut.fi | a swimming ship" *
* gromit.ton.tut.fi/~laitinei/ | *
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Reply to: