Bug#604948: IPv6 problems in Squeeze
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010, Kolbjørn Barmen wrote:
> > > auto eth0
> > > iface eth0 inet static
> > > address 10.10.10.10
> > > gateway 10.10.10.1
> > > netmask 255.255.255.0
> > > iface eth0 inet6 static
> > > address 2001:700:0::beaf
> > > gateway 2001:700::1
> > > netmask 64
> > > up /sbin/sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.eth0.autoconf=0
> > > up /sbin/sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.eth0.accept_ra=0
> > >
> > > But this only work _most_ of the time. Every now and then the sysctl
> > > lines are not performed quickly enough and due to bad luck the
> > > server also picks up autoconf address and router announcement,
> > > ending up with double set of addresses and non-static default route.
> >
> > How about using pre-up? Wouldn't that always work?
>
> Certainly should. I remember having played with "pre-up", but do not
> remember why I ended up with "up" instead.
I have played around with this over the weekend, and using "pre-up" is
just as unreliable as using "up" , the result is the same, every now and
then machines comes up with autoconfigured address and routes.
The only reliable way is to use kernel parameters "ipv6.disable_ipv6=1
ipv6.autoconf=0" and then configure things manually in
/etc/sysctl.d/ipv6.conf accordingly:
net.ipv6.conf.default.autoconf=0
net.ipv6.conf.default.accept_ra=0
net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6 = 0
net.ipv6.conf.all.autoconf=0
net.ipv6.conf.all.accept_ra=0
net.ipv6.conf.lo.disable_ipv6=0
I really find this entire issue most inconvenient, and the only _proper_
solution would be to have autoconf/accept_ra by default off in the kernel
itself, and then let the distros/users enable it with sysctl, which is
pretty darn easy to do, compared to what's needed for static setups now.
But I already lost that battle last year, allthough it did lead to the
kernel module options we have now :P
Ah well, as IPv6 becomes more and more mandatory, I suppose others will
find themselves in the same situation as we are, there will be outcry, and
attitudes will hopefulle change.
--
Kolbjørn Barmen
UNINETT Driftsenter
Reply to: