FS#24634 - no more IPv6 support in rc.conf with iproute2

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Geert Hendrickx (ghen) - Wednesday, 08 June 2011, 20:02 GMT
Last edited by Tom Gundersen (tomegun) - Saturday, 11 June 2011, 16:07 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category System
Status Closed
Assigned To Tom Gundersen (tomegun)
Architecture All
Severity High
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description:
I understand you don't want to support every possible exotic network configuration in rc.conf syntax, but excluding even a simple static IPv4+IPv6 dualstack host is, in 2011 (on World IPv6 day even!), a bit oversimplistic.

With the old ifconfig syntax (which I always thought sucked a bit), it was possible to add an IPv4 and IPv6 address in one line, now it's not even possible anymore without relying on extra tools (nm, netcfg), which I'm not even sure properly support IPv6.

Could the basic address/netmask/gateway syntax be extended with address6/prefixlen6/gateway6 equivalents? I can come up with patches, if you're willing to accept them.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Tom Gundersen (tomegun)
Saturday, 11 June 2011, 16:07 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Additional comments about closing:  Use/patch netcfg
Comment by Tom Gundersen (tomegun) - Wednesday, 08 June 2011, 20:46 GMT
I must confess that I'm slightly ignorant about the details of ipv6 (my ISP does not support it so I don't get to play with it). However, we certainly should support ipv6 to the same degree as we support ipv4, and from a quick look at wikipedia it looks like there is almost never a point in using ipv6 without dual stack. Is that correct?

I wonder how exactly to do it though. I'd rather not make any explicit differences between ipv4 and ipv6, but we'll see what needs doing. Please submit patches to arch-projects@archlinux.org. Maybe also easier so I can see what you have in mind, could you post the ip command you would use to set this up manually?

I'm adding falconindy to the notification of the bug, as he is in charge of the new networking stuff.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Wednesday, 08 June 2011, 20:54 GMT
There is _currently_ never a point in using ipv6 without ipv4, as most of the world is still not ipv6 ready. If you were to use _only_ an ipv6 address, the current structure we have in place is sufficient.

@Tom: it's possible to use an ipv6 tunnel broker to get ipv6 should your ISP not support it directly. RFC 4213 describes a method of encapsulating ipv6 traffic over an ipv4 transport. We even have some documentation on this on our fine wiki:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/IPv6_-_6in4_Tunnel
Comment by Tom Gundersen (tomegun) - Wednesday, 08 June 2011, 21:25 GMT
@geert: after a short discussion with the other devs, we are not really sure if we want to add more stuff to the network support in initscripts (at least not yet). What would, however, be _really_ appreciated is if someone did some work on getting ipv6 support working well in netcfg. I guess whatever patches you had in mind for initscripts should also be relevant for netcfg?
Comment by Michiel Broek (mbroek) - Thursday, 09 June 2011, 18:38 GMT
I like to add that the netcfg scripts should be able to process multiple IPv6 addresses, like in my old configuration a line like:
#Static IP
eth0="eth0 192.168.252.3 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.252.255 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::6/64 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::100/64 \
add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::200/64 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::201/64 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::202/64 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::203/64 \
add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::204/64 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::205/64 add 2001:1af8:feb8:f0fc::206/64"
INTERFACES=(eth0)

Also, don't forget complex routings like:
gateway="default gw 10.10.0.1"
gateway6="default gw 2001:1af8:feb8:10a::1"
net41="-net 10.126.144.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 10.126.151.5"
net42="-net 10.126.145.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 10.126.151.5"
net61="2001:1af8:feb8:90::/64 gw 2001:1af8:feb8:97::5 br0"
net62="2001:1af8:feb8:91::/64 gw 2001:1af8:feb8:97::5 br0"
net63="2001:1af8:feb8:a0::/60 gw 2001:1af8:feb8:97::8 br0"
ROUTES=(net41 net42 gateway net61 net62 net63 gateway6)

I agree that the old rc.conf syntax wasn't always easy, but it did the job well.
Comment by Rémy Oudompheng (remyoudompheng) - Thursday, 09 June 2011, 18:50 GMT
Please see  FS#18699  for netcfg support and a discussion about possible syntaxes.

Loading...