Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #1203

Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren?

From Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.networking
Subject Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren?
Date 2012-03-24 20:41 +0100
Organization Plouf !
Message-ID <jkl815$b2c$1@saria.nerim.net> (permalink)
References <jkhh6u$udm$1@news1.tnib.de> <jkk7ea$30on$1@saria.nerim.net> <slrnjmrjsi.1ls.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>

Show all headers | View raw


Jorgen Grahn a écrit :
> On Sat, 2012-03-24, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Marc Haber a écrit :
>> (automatic translation from german as I do not speak the language)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>>> Can I somehow through local configuration or configuration
>>> ensure the radvd on the router that the same address SLAAC
>>> is taught as "deprecated", making it suitable for outgoing connections
>>> the statically configured address does? Unfortunately, can nagios'
>>> check_ssh plugin not set the source address.
> 
> Unfortunately, it still doesn't make sense to me.

Sure, some words are out of order, but it makes sense to me.
What about this :
"Can I somehow, through local configuration or configuration of
radvd on the router, ensure that the SLAAC address
is taught as "deprecated", making the statically configured address
suitable for outgoing connections ? Unfortunately, nagios check_ssh
plugin cannot set the source address."

>> IME, IPv6 static addresses are preferred over autoconfigured addresses.
> 
> Why? I set it up with radvd here some time ago, and I found it rather
> elegant. The only drawback I can see is long addresses

Maybe there is a misunderstanding in the meaning of "preferred". I did
not mean it as "recommended practice". I just mean that in my
experience, when a Linux host has both statically assigned and
autoconfigured IPv6 addresses in the same prefix, the IPv6 stack always
select the statically assigned address by default. This makes sense to
me, because through static assignment the administrator wants the host
to use that specific address.

Back to comp.os.linux.networking | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-03-23 10:53 +0100
  Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2012-03-24 11:25 +0100
    Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-24 13:43 +0000
      Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2012-03-24 20:41 +0100
        Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-24 21:49 +0000
          Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-04-02 22:10 +0200
      Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-04-02 22:08 +0200
    Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-04-02 22:07 +0200
  Re: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-03-26 06:50 +0200
  Reduce priority of an IPv6 SLAAC adderss (was: IPv6 SLAAC-Adresse herunterpriorisieren?) Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2012-03-26 06:55 +0200

csiph-web