[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: Re: Unknown URL



	Hi.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:36:36PM -0500, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> 
> On 02/22/2018 01:59 PM, Reco wrote:
> > 	Hi.
> > 
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 01:40:45PM -0500, Stephen P. Molnar wrote:
> > >    2) redone:
> > > 
> > > root@AbNormal:/home/comp#
> > > root@AbNormal:/home/comp# ip a d 2600:1700:4280:3690::46/128 dev enp2s0
> > > root@AbNormal:/home/comp#
> > > root@AbNormal:/home/comp# traceroute -n 2a04:4e42:b::204
> > > traceroute to 2a04:4e42:b::204 (2a04:4e42:b::204), 30 hops max, 80 byte
> > > packets
> > >   1  * * *
> > That either means that AT&T is doing something very clever, or I
> > don't understand what's going on. Or both.
> > 
> > Ok, next part. Reset your network settings.
> > 
> > Check your IPv6 "readiness" by visiting [1] and performing appropriate
> > link clicks according to [2].
> > 
> > Oh, and the file - /tmp/fastly.pcap . I'm still interested in it.
> > 
> > [1] http://www.att.com/esupport/ipv6.jsp
> > 
> > [2] https://rolande.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/enabling-ipv6-on-my-home-network-part-2-att/
> 
> The missing file is attached.

The contents are different from what I hoped for. Two TCP IPv4 packets,
and that's it. Does not clarify things at all.


> OK.
> 
> I went to URL #1  and ran their compatibility test.  The result was:
> 
> Alert!
> Unfortunately, we are unable to access Troubleshoot & Resolve at this time.
> For further assistance, please visit att.com/esupport
> <https://att.com/esupport>.

Translating from AT&T lingua that's probably means that you should not
have IPv6, or that /60 block they assigned to you does not function.
Or not. I suggest you to clear it with them.


> However, when I logged in to my router it showed the Broadband configured
> rot all ports 1 through 4 and being 'Auto', and IPv6 is shown as 'On' for
> IPv6, DHCPv6 and DHPv6 Prefix Delegation and with the Router Advertisement
> MTU WITH A VALUE OF 1500.

That's unusual. For IPv6 it should be 1480 if they are still using
tunnel. But it does not explain traceroute problem (a typical traceroute
packet size is much smaller).


I need to think about it. I have that feeling that I'm missing something
trivial.

Reco


Reply to: