Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add auto_linklocal option to the IPv6 bridge. #511

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

madpilot78
Copy link
Contributor

I'm using dnsmasq to assign IPs to machines. It can also send router advertisement messages allowing to use SLAAC in VMs to get IPv6 addresses.

I'm an IPv6 novice so my description could not be completely accurate, but these advertisement messages MUST be sent using link local IPv6 addresses to be conformant, otherwise OSes ignore them.

In FreebSD bridge(4) interfaces by default have no link local addresses.

Adding the auto_linklocal causes the interface to autoassign a valid link local address, so SLAAC works properly.

I suggest enabling this unconditionally, I don't see any ill effects this could cause, considering the bridge is used as a swtich.

@madpilot78 madpilot78 changed the title Add auto_linklocal option to the IPv6 brigde. Add auto_linklocal option to the IPv6 bridge. Jun 14, 2023
I'm using dnsmasq to assign IPs to machines. It can also send router advertisement messages allowing to use SLAAC in VMs to get IPv6 addresses.

I'm an IPv6 novice so my description could not be completely accurate, but these advertisement messages MUST be sent using link local IPv6 addresses to be conformant, otherwise OSes ignore them.

In FreebSD bridge(4) interfaces by default have no link local addresses.

Adding the auto_linklocal causes the interface to autoassign a valid link local address, so SLAAC works properly.

I suggest enabling this unconditionally, I don't see any ill effects this could cause, considering the bridge is used as a swtich.
@madpilot78 madpilot78 force-pushed the IPv6_auto_linklocal branch from 190b919 to fdbb9bd Compare June 14, 2023 08:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant