Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 17:43:11 +0000 From: Justin Cormack <justin@...cialbusservice.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: IPv4 and IPv6 addresses in resolv.conf On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Rob <robpilling@...il.com> wrote: > Rich Felker, Sat, 30 Nov 2013: > >>> >>> It is EAFNOSUPPORT if no kernel support at all. >>> >>> Actually I don't think there can be any cases where sending to the >>> v4-mapped address (ie ::ffff:220.127.116.11) can fail where an ipv4 socket >>> will succeed because those are basically ipv4 sockets with just ipv6 >>> notation, those addresses can't be routed by the ipv6 stack. So it >> >> >> One thing I'm confused about is the addresses on the actual packets. >> If we've already called bind for address :: and gotten assigned port >> N, does this also reserve port N on 0.0.0.0, which will be needed when >> sending from (and receiving back) IPv4 packets? Also, is there some >> kernel option we might need to worry about that prevents :: from >> receiving packets sent to IPv4 addresses, or does that only apply to >> TCP, not UDP? > > > I've been seeing this output consistently from mpd at startup: > > listen: bind to '0.0.0.0:6600' failed: Address already in use > (continuing anyway, because binding to '[::]:6600' succeeded) > > mpd is the only program on my machine that binds to 6600 so it would > appear that :: port bindings reserve the ipv4 port too. Could be a > kernel configuration option though... > Yes the default is that ipv6 binds to both ipv6 and ipv4. There is a sockopt IPV6_V6ONLY or /proc/sys/net/ipv6/bindv6only which defaults to 0. I guess scheme above is going to fail if /proc/sys/net/ipv6/bindv6only is set to 1, so the sockopt will have to be set manually as well to force binding on both. Justin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.