Please reply only to the list; thanks. On 29/05/06 09:42, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 23:45 -0600, Darryl Gregorash wrote:
Install 9.0, do not install any updates; leave ipv6 enables, but do not do anything with it beyond allowing the LINKLOCAL ip to be assigned on the external interface. Then ftp (lukemftp package) to a known site that has a public ipv6 address (such as ftp.mozilla.org). Watch ftp wait forever for a response, because it is in a perennial loop, trying to send a SYN packet to an ipv6 address, originating from a LINKLOCAL ip.
Again, name resolution issue.
No, it is *not* a name resolution issue. Name resolution works just fine. The problem is what happens after that. You might try actually reading what people are saying to you before replying. When you do reply, try phrasing things like you are talking to the general public (which is who the list participants are) and not a conference room full of software engineers or members of the IEEE. It does not matter that it is a client error, not (afaik) an error in the ipv6 implementation. The only thing that matters to most people is that the problem only shows up when ipv6 is enabled, and it is highly detrimental to the functionality of the system. Your contributions to this thread have not helped them one iota in resolving that issue. Most people don't care in the slightest about linklocal, site local, public and all that nice stuff. All they know is they have an IP (or instructions to use dhcp) from their internet provider, and when they use it they have a problem.
If you mix IPv6 LINK LOCAL with IPv4 PUBLIC, without either providing a IPv6 PUBLIC (or old SITE LOCAL) -- or much easier -- just put in a router that handles such IPv4 to IPv6 issues, yes, you'll run into this.
Yes, let's all just rush right out and set up a 6to4 tunnel. I am sure that every list participant knows how to do that already. Oh wait, *I* don't even know how to do that already, and I have been trying to make sense out of the various howtos on the subject for quite some time now. They're just one more example of why you do not want the software author to write the documentation.