Re: "accept_ra 1" vs "accept_ra 2" in interfaces configuration-file
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 03:58:36PM +0300, Martin T wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 7:55 AM Andy Smith <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Back in 2011 this was a hard-won battle:
> > http://strugglers.net/~andy/blog/2011/09/04/linux-ipv6-router-advertisements-and-forwarding/
> Thanks for this very informative blog post! However, setting the
> "net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding" to 1 in /etc/sysctl.conf and
> "accept_ra" to 2 in /etc/network/interfaces for ISP facing
> interface(eth0) didn't work for me. I expected SLAAC to work, but it
> didn't. I'm running kernel version 4.9.0.
Strange. I've had a look and it seems I continued to use the
workaround mentioned in the blog post even though supposedly I no
longer need to. If you use that workaround, does it (SLAAC) start
working for you?
Also, is it just address assignment that doesn't work or is it also
default router assignment that doesn't work? On my servers that
forward v6 I don't use dynamic assignment of addresses, I statically
assign them, but I do use dynamic assignment of default route.