ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

iphitus · 2006-04-10 13:00:15

mcubed: those are issues on debian, and sound more like a misconfiguration than issue with ipv6.

Anyway, I'll modularise it for all of you's in beyond. Though it gets auto loaded anyway in the end the moment an application tries to use it.

Enjoy,

James

Snarkout · 2006-04-10 13:29:50

mcubed wrote:

OSX, debian, arch, ipv6, etc...

FWIW, ipv6 screws up a lot of things under OSX as well. The hell-desk techs where I work generally have customers disable ipv6 due to all the problems with DNS and apple's ipv6 configuration. And FWIW firefox has problems with ipv6 under OSX as well.

IPv6 is a neat idea, and it's cool that people here like to use it (though outside of their own lans I have no idea how they are doing so), but it's not something I'm looking forward to at all. NAT also has nothing to do with v4 vs v6 - I saw that comment and cringed. NAT/PAT is extremely useful regardless of the number of available IPs in the world.

Mikos · 2006-04-10 15:06:02

though outside of their own lans I have no idea how they are doing so

Just look at www.sixxs.net and radvd

NAT also has nothing to do with v4 vs v6 - I saw that comment and cringed. NAT/PAT is extremely useful regardless of the number of available IPs in the world.

This is completely wrong. NAT is _evil_ and is against the idea of Internet. And IPv6 is supposed to eliminate NAT. NAT must die! :twisted:

NAT doesn't bring better security as some people do think. Firewall is here to bring better security, not NAT. You can use firewall to control traffic on your router without NAT.

cactus · 2006-04-10 16:48:51

Nat is extremely useful, if used correctly.
For instance..nat'ing inbound ipsec tunnel traffic, so you can cascade tunnels. The tunnel definition has to be interesting to both sides of the tunnel, and nat'ing the inbound so that it matches the tunnel definition is generally the recommended solution (so that you are not offering universe all the time).

Just use it appropriately...
like mr. T says, dont be a sucka!

Gullible Jones · 2006-04-10 19:41:52

Wait, Xorg requires IPv6 to be enabled? I thought that use of IPv6 with Xorg was optional? :?

Mikos · 2006-04-10 19:59:44

X.Org is compiled with IPv6 support. And it is _good_ thing. If you don't like it (or you can't withstand few error messages if you dissabled IPv6 in kernel/removed IPv6 module), then you can recompile xorg-server by yourself - this is why ABS is here.

JGC · 2006-04-10 21:16:50

ipv6 is a module now, it gets autoloaded by default, so both sides can be happy: on one side the people that want ipv6 to be available all the time, on the other side people who don't want ipv6, but don't want to recompile the kernel.

I don't get it why this should be such a big discussion with flames all over the place, keeping it as module is the easiest solution here.

mcubed · 2006-04-10 22:01:21

Mikos wrote:

mcubed: This is really _NOT_ a Linux problem. And it is not problem with IPv6. It is problem with bad application support for IPv6. So yes, you should tell Firefox developers about this problem, not Arch Linux developers or Debian developers. Firefox have bad implemented IPv6 support and should be fixed, it's that simple (this is why it works for you without problems if IPv6 is disabled).

Mikos, I'm still searching for a reasonably jargon-free explanation for why it is a Firefox problem when Firefox worked fine under OS X without any modifications -- no disabling of IPv6 necessary, not in OS X, not in Firefox. It just works. On Debian, it did not, and more than just Firefox was broken. At the very least, it seems to me that it has to be a Debian problem, if not a problem with the Linux kernel itself. (Of course, Debian modifies the kernel anyway, so maybe they introduced some errors.)

People keep blaming Firefox when it is not the only thing affected and when it works fine under a different OS on the very same network. It doesn't make any sense to me, and no one has explained why it's FF's fault. They just keep saying it is.

The other thing is that disabling IPv6 by commenting out the appropriate line in /etc/modprobe.d/aliases didn't fix the problem. It makes Firefox and other Gecko browsers function again, but I still couldn't, for example, connect to the Debian servers without pinging them first. If I didn't ping them, the connection would time out.

Mikos wrote:

Sometimes it is also problem with misconfigured DNS servers. Again, this is _NOT_ Linux or IPv6 problem, this is problem of administrators of that bad DNS server.

A misconfigured DNS can break apps in Debian but not affect the same apps in OS X? How? It's the same DNS, the same modem/router.

Mikos wrote:

But to tell you truth, I have never had such a problem. So this is not a general problem. And btw. I am actively using IPv6 for more than year without problems (but I haven't got problems also before my IPv6 connectivity, so as I said, this is not a general problem).

The problem probably would not exist if we all had IPv6 available. The problem happens when your ISP doesn't offer IPv6 connectivity and your computer (at some level -- OS, kernel, apps) expect it to be present. It's not the presence of IPv6 that causes problems, it is the absence of it. The tunnelling of IPv6 over IPv4 and whatever other hacks have gone into this "transition" phase. It doesn't seem to be a widespread problem, except where at least some Linux distros are concerned (though see Snarkout's message about OS X). I've come across messages about issues in SuSE, Fedora, and Gentoo as well as Debian and Ubuntu. There's a thread on the Ubuntu dev forum about how one developer said some people he works with told him they tried Ubuntu, but "the internet didn't work." I've volunteered at Free Geek here in Portland. Free Geek recycles or rebuilds old computers people and companies donate, mostly for non-profits and voluteers. Low-end machines get resold in a small store attached. Debian or Ubuntu is installed on these machines, and people there have told me that sometimes people bring the machines back because they say the internet is broken. Guess why? So I think this problem affects more people than you realize.

Arch Linux

#51 2006-04-10 13:00:15

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#52 2006-04-10 13:29:50

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#53 2006-04-10 15:06:02

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#54 2006-04-10 16:48:51

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#55 2006-04-10 19:41:52

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#56 2006-04-10 19:59:44

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#57 2006-04-10 21:16:50

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

#58 2006-04-10 22:01:21

Re: ipv6 and stock Arch kernel26

Board footer