Hello
Because I did not send , and then retransmitted.
I am using the CentOS5.7. In a state where the link down, I did a ping to the IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 succeeds in ping. but, IPv6 is ping fails. Once confirmed by ifconfig, it did not have a Link-Local Address. At link down, Is the Link-Local Address not set? Leave the link down, Is there a way to avoid this?
# ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: 〜 Link detected: no
# ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:786 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:289 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:81093 (79.1 KiB) TX bytes:46507 (45.4 KiB)
# ping 192.168.11.8 PING 192.168.11.8 (192.168.11.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.033 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.019 ms 〜
# ping6 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) 56 data bytes
Thanks!
The current version of Centos 5, is 5.11
An immediate upgrade is recommeneded.
Thanks for the response.
I have updated CentOS5 to 11. However, It did not resolve....
On 2015/11/12 23:05, Always Learning wrote:
On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 14:57 +0900, 米山陽介 wrote:
I am using the CentOS5.7.
The current version of Centos 5, is 5.11
An immediate upgrade is recommeneded.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
Hello
Because I did not send , and then retransmitted.
I am using the CentOS5.7. In a state where the link down, I did a ping to the IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 succeeds in ping. but, IPv6 is ping fails. Once confirmed by ifconfig, it did not have a Link-Local Address. At link down, Is the Link-Local Address not set? Leave the link down, Is there a way to avoid this?
# ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: 〜 Link detected: no
# ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:786 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:289 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:81093 (79.1 KiB) TX bytes:46507 (45.4 KiB)
# ping 192.168.11.8 PING 192.168.11.8 (192.168.11.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.033 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.019 ms 〜
# ping6 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) 56 data bytes
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8
Thanks for the response.
I tried. However, It did not resolve....
# ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) from fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8a eth1: 56 data bytes
On 2015/11/13 2:22, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
Hello
Because I did not send , and then retransmitted.
I am using the CentOS5.7. In a state where the link down, I did a ping to the IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 succeeds in ping. but, IPv6 is ping fails. Once confirmed by ifconfig, it did not have a Link-Local Address. At link down, Is the Link-Local Address not set? Leave the link down, Is there a way to avoid this?
# ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: no
# ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:786 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:289 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:81093 (79.1 KiB) TX bytes:46507 (45.4 KiB)
# ping 192.168.11.8 PING 192.168.11.8 (192.168.11.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.033 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.019 ms ～
# ping6 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) 56 data bytes
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8Thanks for the response.
I tried. However, It did not resolve....
# ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) from fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8a eth1: 56 data bytes
First off, I assume you can ping your link-local address:
ping6 -I eth1 fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8a
Second, you never mentioned how eth1 was assigned its IPv6 address. Given that you've tried to embed an IPv4 address within an IPv6 address (which is normally done with a 0:0:0:0:0: prefix), I'd guess you did it manually. If so, with what tools?
On 2015/11/13 2:22, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
Hello
Because I did not send , and then retransmitted.
I am using the CentOS5.7. In a state where the link down, I did a ping to the IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 succeeds in ping. but, IPv6 is ping fails. Once confirmed by ifconfig, it did not have a Link-Local Address. At link down, Is the Link-Local Address not set? Leave the link down, Is there a way to avoid this?
# ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: no
# ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:786 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:289 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:81093 (79.1 KiB) TX bytes:46507 (45.4 KiB)
# ping 192.168.11.8 PING 192.168.11.8 (192.168.11.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.033 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.019 ms ～
# ping6 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) 56 data bytes
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
First off, I assume you can ping your link-local address:
ping6 -I eth1 fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8a
Second, you never mentioned how eth1 was assigned its IPv6 address. Given that you've tried to embed an IPv4 address within an IPv6 address (which is normally done with a 0:0:0:0:0: prefix), I'd guess you did it manually. If so, with what tools?
Thanks for the response. I'm sorry when it was misguided answer.
The setting of the IP address reaches by manual operation.
# cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 DEVICE=eth1 BOOTPROTO="none" ONBOOT=yes HWADDR=08:00:27:83:74:54 IPADDR=192.168.11.8 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 IPV6INIT=yes IPV6ADDR=2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 IPV6_DEFAULTGW=2000:7000:12:6::1
■ link up # ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: yes
# ifdown eth1 # ifup eth1 # ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::a00:27ff:fe83:7454/64 Scope:Link ←○ inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global
■ link down # ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: no
# ifdown eth1 # ifup eth1 # ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global
Missing fe80::a00:27ff:fe83:7454/64.
On 2015/11/14 1:19, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8Thanks for the response.
I tried. However, It did not resolve....
# ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8 PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) from fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8a eth1: 56 data bytes
First off, I assume you can ping your link-local address:
ping6 -I eth1 fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8a
Second, you never mentioned how eth1 was assigned its IPv6 address. Given that you've tried to embed an IPv4 address within an IPv6 address (which is normally done with a 0:0:0:0:0: prefix), I'd guess you did it manually. If so, with what tools?
On 2015/11/13 2:22, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
Hello
Because I did not send , and then retransmitted. I am using the CentOS5.7.
In a state where the link down, I did a ping to the IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 succeeds in ping. but, IPv6 is ping fails. Once confirmed by ifconfig, it did not have a Link-Local Address. At link down, Is the Link-Local Address not set? Leave the link down, Is there a way to avoid this?
# ethtool eth1
Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: no
# ifconfig eth1
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 >
Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:786 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:289 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:81093 (79.1 KiB) TX bytes:46507 (45.4 KiB)# ping 192.168.11.8
PING 192.168.11.8 (192.168.11.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.033 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.11.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.019 ms ～
# ping6 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8
PING 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8(2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8) 56 data bytes
Try
ping6 -I eth1 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, 米山陽介 wrote:
First off, I assume you can ping your link-local address:
ping6 -I eth1 fe80::a00:27ff:fe03:5b8aSecond, you never mentioned how eth1 was assigned its IPv6 address. Given that you've tried to embed an IPv4 address within an IPv6 address (which is normally done with a 0:0:0:0:0: prefix), I'd guess you did it manually. If so, with what tools?
Thanks for the response. I'm sorry when it was misguided answer.
The setting of the IP address reaches by manual operation.
# cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 DEVICE=eth1 BOOTPROTO="none" ONBOOT=yes HWADDR=08:00:27:83:74:54 IPADDR=192.168.11.8 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 IPV6INIT=yes IPV6ADDR=2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 IPV6_DEFAULTGW=2000:7000:12:6::1
First off, I'm pretty sure you've got a typo in your gateway definition: it should be 2000:8000:12:6::1 (not :7000:).
Second, I've never tested how well the init scripts expand "::" notation in IPv6 addresses. They may work fine, or you may have to expand it yourself, e.g.,
IPV6_DEFAULTGW=2000:8000:12:6:0:0:0:1
When doing static IPv6 configuration, it's probably best to set
IPV6_AUTOCONF=no
Even if all that works, however, I'm not sure where you got the 2000:8000:12:6::/64 prefix. I think the current range of routable addresses starts at 2001:0000::1. I doubt your packets will be able to traverse the Internet with a 2000:8000:: address.
If you want to do IPv6 locally, you should be able to use the link-local address space, fe80::.
If you want a globally valid IPv6 address, your Internet provider will have to give you a route or you'll have to set yourself up with a IPv6 tunnelling service.
■ link up # ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: yes
# ifdown eth1 # ifup eth1 # ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::a00:27ff:fe83:7454/64 Scope:Link ←○ inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global
■ link down # ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: ～ Link detected: no
# ifdown eth1 # ifup eth1 # ifconfig eth1 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:83:74:54 inet addr:192.168.11.8 Bcast:192.168.11.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2000:8000:12:6:192:168:11:8/64 Scope:Global
Missing fe80::a00:27ff:fe83:7454/64.
The link-local address should always be present, but I've never done a lot a ifdown/ifup operations to see how they can muck things up.
I'd try "service network restart" to get full interface initialization.
-
Always Learning -
Paul Heinlein -
米山陽介