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

FS#95 - system looses IPv6 prefix after valid_lft reaches 0 #7088

Closed
openwrt-bot opened this issue Aug 16, 2016 · 7 comments
Closed

FS#95 - system looses IPv6 prefix after valid_lft reaches 0 #7088

openwrt-bot opened this issue Aug 16, 2016 · 7 comments
Labels

Comments

@openwrt-bot
Copy link

cp:

Trunk odhcp6c somehow lets the valid-lifetime of interface expire and the prefix if the quite logically getting dropped from the interface.

This has been tested on several types of interfaces ethernet copper , SFP modules , GEPON ONU SFP
and various versions of OpenWRT all resulting in the same loss of prefix.

The same tests performed on Virtual Machines running OpenWRT kernel 4.4.7 x86_64
The VM behave normally which is difficult to explain except by the difference of architecture and drivers ?

I believe that LEDE has the same problem.

I will give configuration for LEDE/OPENWRT to test with later on.

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

cp:

The workaround for this is :

echo 0 > /sys/devices/virtual/net/br-lan/bridge/multicast_snooping

It is an old bug (still present) in kernel 4.4.15 (at least)

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

satlan:

I can confirm it's happening on my current LEDE build (WNDR3700). I can't pinpoint exactly when it started however.

And the above workaround worked. I've made it permanent for now.

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

bendavid:

I also have this problem on LEDE Reboot SNAPSHOT r2803-b9857b21c2

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

baurmatt:

I'm still seeing those issues:

Client:

user@exmaple-ThinkPad:~$ ip -6 r
2003:8c:4b21:8201::147 dev wlp3s0 proto kernel metric 256 expires 13893sec pref medium
2003:8c:4b21:8201::/64 dev wlp3s0 proto kernel metric 256 expires 13612sec pref medium
2003:8c:4b21:8200::/56 via fe80::6038:e0ff:feb8:e580 dev wlp3s0 proto ra metric 600 pref medium
fdf1:f673:aad0:1::147 dev wlp3s0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium
fdf1:f673:aad0:1::/64 dev wlp3s0 proto kernel metric 256 expires 604756sec pref medium
fdf1:f673:aad0::/48 via fe80::6038:e0ff:feb8:e580 dev wlp3s0 proto ra metric 600 pref medium
fe80::/64 dev wlp3s0 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium
default via fe80::6038:e0ff:feb8:e580 dev wlp3s0 proto static metric 600 pref medium

Router:

root@LEDE:~# ip -6 r
default from 2003:8c:4b21:8200::/56 via fe80::230:88ff:fe01:fd21 dev pppoe-wan metric 512
default from 2003:8c:4b7f:a182::/64 via fe80::230:88ff:fe01:fd21 dev pppoe-wan metric 512
2003:8c:4b21:8200::/64 dev br-guest metric 1024
2003:8c:4b21:8201::/64 dev br-lan metric 1024
unreachable 2003:8c:4b21:8200::/56 dev lo metric 2147483647 error -113
2003:8c:4b7f:a182::/64 dev pppoe-wan metric 256
fdf1:f673:aad0::/64 dev br-guest metric 1024
fdf1:f673:aad0:1::/64 dev br-lan metric 1024
unreachable fdf1:f673:aad0::/48 dev lo metric 2147483647 error -113
fe80::/64 dev br-lan metric 256
fe80::/64 dev wlan1 metric 256
fe80::/64 dev br-guest metric 256
fe80::/64 dev wlan1-1 metric 256
fe80::/64 dev wlan0 metric 256
fe80::/64 dev wlan0-1 metric 256
fe80::/64 dev eth1 metric 256
fe80::/10 dev pppoe-wan metric 1
fe80::/10 dev pppoe-wan metric 256
unreachable default dev lo metric -1 error -101
ff00::/8 dev br-lan metric 256
ff00::/8 dev br-guest metric 256
ff00::/8 dev wlan1 metric 256
ff00::/8 dev wlan1-1 metric 256
ff00::/8 dev wlan0 metric 256
ff00::/8 dev wlan0-1 metric 256
ff00::/8 dev eth1 metric 256
ff00::/8 dev pppoe-wan metric 256
unreachable default dev lo metric -1 error -101

Using LEDE Reboot (17.01.4, r3560-79f57e422d)

Can this please be reopened?

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

baurmatt:

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

lynxis:

@matthias, does this still occurs?

@openwrt-bot
Copy link
Author

cp:

This has been fixed in the latest kernel.

I can confirm this and this can indeed be closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant