On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 19:29 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:25:09PM -0400, Eloy Paris wrote:On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 04:43:55PM -0400, Stuart Gathman wrote:On 10/20/2015 02:28 PM, Eloy Paris wrote:Are these delays normal; do they depend on the frequency of router advertisements? If so, can NM not elicit a router advertisements by sending a router solicitation? If that is what is supposed to happen then I don't understand the delays. In contrast, IPv4 configuration is immediate.Part of the problem is NM groups together route discovery and SLAAC, this makes it unusable for us in our ipv6 only clusters. I'm in the process of fixing this now so you can still have proper route discovery and use dhcpv6 or static addressing and then you'll get the immediate ipv6 configuration. Thanks,That'd be nice; I look forward to this in a future NM release.I just set radvd frequency to 10 secs. Still not "instant", but fast enough for government work, and not too much overhead.That's a good "workaround". Another one is to use SLAAC, which seems to result in instantaneous configuration under NM. The problem is on corporate network environments where the IT folks have configured the network for stateful configuration (DHCPv6) -- in those environments it is not possible for a regular employee (my case, for example) to change the frequency of RA messages, or to move to SLACC from DHCPv6.NetworkManager SHOULD send a Router Solicitation when the network interface comes up, and the router should respond with a Router Advertisement quickly. I don't know if that is what happens.
NetworkManager is certainly supposed to send router solitations and it usually does. Everything else would be a bug. Could you turn of debug-logging and provide the logfile to find out why it takes so long? /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf [logging] level=DEBUG domains=ALL and restart NM. then `journalctl -u NetworkManager` And/Or: Didn't you see the RS requests when looking at the tcpdump output? Can you see on the wire-level the messages and does it indicate what's wrong? Thanks, Thomas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part