From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 8 22:34:41 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3DD9A67; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 22:34:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.allbsd.org (gatekeeper.allbsd.org [IPv6:2001:2f0:104:e001::32]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29295FB4; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 22:34:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alph.allbsd.org (p1137-ipbf1505funabasi.chiba.ocn.ne.jp [118.7.212.137]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.allbsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r08MYEYd050344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Jan 2013 07:34:24 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by alph.allbsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r08MYAb6003788; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 07:34:12 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 07:33:54 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20130109.073354.730245417155474512.hrs@allbsd.org> To: uqs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: sendmail vs ipv6 broken after upgrade to 9.1 From: Hiroki Sato In-Reply-To: <20130108184051.GI35868@acme.spoerlein.net> References: <20130108151837.GF35868@acme.spoerlein.net> <50EC5922.5030600@boland.org> <20130108184051.GI35868@acme.spoerlein.net> X-PGPkey-fingerprint: BDB3 443F A5DD B3D0 A530 FFD7 4F2C D3D8 2793 CF2D X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 23.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="--Security_Multipart(Wed_Jan__9_07_33_54_2013_793)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.4 at gatekeeper.allbsd.org X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mail.allbsd.org [133.31.130.32]); Wed, 09 Jan 2013 07:34:26 +0900 (JST) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.2 required=13.0 tests=CONTENT_TYPE_PRESENT, FAKEDWORD_ATMARK,MIMEQENC,ONLY1HOPDIRECT,QENCPTR2,SAMEHELOBY2HOP, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on gatekeeper.allbsd.org Cc: michiel@boland.org, stable@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 22:34:41 -0000 ----Security_Multipart(Wed_Jan__9_07_33_54_2013_793)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ulrich Sp=F6rlein wrote in <20130108184051.GI35868@acme.spoerlein.net>: uq> After setting this, it now looks like this: uq> root@acme: ~# ip6addrctl uq> Prefix Prec Label Use uq> ::1/128 50 0 0 uq> ::/0 40 1 0 uq> 2002::/16 30 2 0 uq> ::/96 20 3 0 uq> ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 10 4 0 uq> = uq> And even sendmail is happily finding the sockets to bind to. Thanks= for the hint! I think this just hides the problem. If gshapiro@'s explanation is correct, no ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 address should be returned if the name resolution works fine... -- Hiroki ----Security_Multipart(Wed_Jan__9_07_33_54_2013_793)-- Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAlDsntIACgkQTyzT2CeTzy1FpACgh0Lf3xhckaYJm73XTp8RE/K2 Qb0AoK3x0ZDIdE3VtXynlr8IyLThdolr =qShq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----Security_Multipart(Wed_Jan__9_07_33_54_2013_793)----