Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
"Derek Atkins" <derek at ihtfp.com> writes: > Yes, I'm sure. I need this to work for a while during a transition phase. > Right now my ipv6 address space is over a tunnel that I do not want to use > for general traffic, which is why I don't want to just turn on v6 for > everything. I'd be happy to somehow turn off link local addresses, but I > don't know how to do that, frankly. But honestly it should be > straightforward to debug postfix to figure out why it's blocking my local > hosts when they come in via v6 link-local but not when they come in via > v6-public or via v4. ULA (rfc4193, fd00::/8 addresses that you generate randomly, don't need scope)? You can't turn link local off, it's similar to "I want to run tcp without this pesky IP thing". Unlike link-local, ULA isn't magic "no-routing, avoid selecting this address" sauce. Much like rfc1918 in these regards. ACL processing is a specific area that's prone to breakage when something has a slight flub in link-local handling. The fact that it let you specify nonsense without complaining doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy about it's handling of link local being 100% sane. Can't help you with the detailed postfix debugging, it hasn't given me a lot of reason to get that angry with in longer than memory for that level of detail. The source is somewhat approachable as I remember, if only to find out how to crank the debugging up.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |