IPv6 and cvsup servers

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

IPv6 and cvsup servers

Garance A Drosehn-2
Some of my friends have been moving their machines into the world of
IPv6.  It seems that the cvsup program is old enough that it doesn't
know about IPv6 (true?).  So they went to use the csup program in
the base system, and while that seems to understand IPv6 just fine,
they couldn't seem to make a connection to any of the official cvsup
servers that they tried via IPv6.

E.g:  "It looks like cvsup4.freebsd.org is refusing connections
        on ipv6 despite it having an AAAA record."

Is this expected?  Given that the servers are all using the cvsup
program, it wouldn't surprise me if they can't handle connections
from IPv6 hosts.  But if that's the case, then why are there AAAA
records for the cvsup*.freebsd.org hostnames?

(apologies if this was a dumb question, but I haven't done much with
IPv6)

--
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   [hidden email]
Senior Systems Programmer           or  [hidden email]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hubs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers

Peter Losher
(wearing my cvsup4/freebsd.isc.org hat on)

Garance A Drosihn wrote:

> Some of my friends have been moving their machines into the world of
> IPv6.  It seems that the cvsup program is old enough that it doesn't
> know about IPv6 (true?).

Correct cvsup/cvsupd are written in Modula3, which doesn't know anything
about IPv6 (and I am pretty certain that it likely never will)

> So they went to use the csup program in
> the base system, and while that seems to understand IPv6 just fine,
> they couldn't seem to make a connection to any of the official cvsup
> servers that they tried via IPv6.
>
> E.g:  "It looks like cvsup4.freebsd.org is refusing connections
>        on ipv6 despite it having an AAAA record."
>
> Is this expected?

Yes; for now.  Hopefully at some point there will be a IPv6-aware &
native replacement for cvsupd, and if so, I hope to be the first one
running it.

(and no I am not interested in 6tunnel'ing; this isn't 2003 anymore)

> Given that the servers are all using the cvsup
> program, it wouldn't surprise me if they can't handle connections
> from IPv6 hosts.  But if that's the case, then why are there AAAA
> records for the cvsup*.freebsd.org hostnames?

Because the mirror *.freebsd.org hostnames are in fact CNAME's; in
cvsup4's case it's pointed to freebsd.isc.org, which has the A & AAAA
records, and we do offer IPv6 for www5 and ftp4.

I don't really see it as a problem at the moment since IPv6 connections
via csup to cvsup4 are immediately refused and it retries on the IPv4
address which will hopefully just work. (I assume your friends are dual
stack and are not IPv6 only?)

> (apologies if this was a dumb question, but I haven't done much with
> IPv6)

No worries.  Hope this helps clear this up for you.

Best Wishes - Peter
--
[hidden email] | ISC | OpenPGP 0xE8048D08 | "The bits must flow"



signature.asc (201 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers

Randy Bush
>> E.g:  "It looks like cvsup4.freebsd.org is refusing connections
>>        on ipv6 despite it having an AAAA record."
>>
>> Is this expected?
>
> Yes; for now.

then perhaps that particular name should not have a AAAA rr?

> Because the mirror *.freebsd.org hostnames are in fact CNAME's; in
> cvsup4's case it's pointed to freebsd.isc.org, which has the A & AAAA
> records, and we do offer IPv6 for www5 and ftp4.

ahhh.  then perhaps cvsup4 should not be a cname for the nonce?
assuming ipv4 fallback turns out to be a bit optimistic i fear. :(

randy
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hubs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers

John Hay-3
In reply to this post by Garance A Drosehn-2
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 01:33:24AM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:

> Some of my friends have been moving their machines into the world of
> IPv6.  It seems that the cvsup program is old enough that it doesn't
> know about IPv6 (true?).  So they went to use the csup program in
> the base system, and while that seems to understand IPv6 just fine,
> they couldn't seem to make a connection to any of the official cvsup
> servers that they tried via IPv6.
>
> E.g:  "It looks like cvsup4.freebsd.org is refusing connections
>        on ipv6 despite it having an AAAA record."
>
> Is this expected?  Given that the servers are all using the cvsup
> program, it wouldn't surprise me if they can't handle connections
> from IPv6 hosts.  But if that's the case, then why are there AAAA
> records for the cvsup*.freebsd.org hostnames?
>
> (apologies if this was a dumb question, but I haven't done much with
> IPv6)

I use socat on cvsup.za.freebsd.org. Something like:

/usr/local/bin/socat -ly TCP6-LISTEN:5999,fork,reuseaddr TCP4:127.0.0.1:5999

We have some ipv6-only networks and there I use the reverse to get
cvsup to work over these nets.

John
--
John Hay -- [hidden email] / [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hubs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers

Rudolf Cejka
John Hay wrote (2008/03/31):
> I use socat on cvsup.za.freebsd.org. Something like:
> /usr/local/bin/socat -ly TCP6-LISTEN:5999,fork,reuseaddr TCP4:127.0.0.1:5999

Hello, cvsup.cz.FreeBSD.org should accept IPv6 cvsup connections too.
As a quick how-to for the others, you can put

--
#!/bin/sh

nohup /usr/local/bin/socat -ly \
  tcp6-listen:5999,fork,reuseaddr \
  tcp4:localhost:5999 >/dev/null 2>&1 &

--

into your /etc/rc.local, or patch socat with

--- socat.c.orig Tue Mar  6 22:03:28 2007
+++ socat.c Fri Mar  9 18:04:33 2007
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@
 #endif /* WITH_MSGLEVEL <= E_DEBUG */
 
    /* not sure what signal should print a message */
-   Signal(SIGHUP, socat_signal);
+   Signal(SIGHUP, SIG_IGN);
    Signal(SIGINT, socat_signal);
    Signal(SIGQUIT, socat_signal);
    Signal(SIGILL, socat_signal);
@@ -1295,7 +1295,6 @@
       break;
    case SIGTERM:
       Warn1("exiting on signal %d", signum); break;
-   case SIGHUP:  
    case SIGINT:
       Notice1("exiting on signal %d", signum); break;
    }
--

and put socat into rc.local in a simpler form:

--
#!/bin/sh

/usr/local/bin/socat -ly \
  tcp6-listen:5999,fork,reuseaddr \
  tcp4:localhost:5999 &

--

The problem is that socat does not survive booting sequence, because
it received HUP signal, which terminates it by default.

Regards.

--
Rudolf Cejka <cejkar at fit.vutbr.cz> http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~cejkar
Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Information Technology
Bozetechova 2, 612 66  Brno, Czech Republic
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hubs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers

Jaeho Shin-2
In reply to this post by Peter Losher
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 00:00:35 -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
[...]
> Correct cvsup/cvsupd are written in Modula3, which doesn't know anything
> about IPv6 (and I am pretty certain that it likely never will)

cvsup2.kr.freebsd.org is running on a Debian 4.0 amd64 system, and
cvsupd is really a huge pain for us.  We are using some ancient
cvsup/cvsupd i386 .deb packages with old i386 C, M3, and X libraries
installed separately.  Those cvsup packages even disapeared from Debian
experimental, perhaps a few years ago.  I haven't tried CM3 or other
compilers instead of ezm3 yet, but neither are they available on Debian.
CVSup seems to have no future, so putting any effort into it seemed
pointless.


>
> >So they went to use the csup program in
> >the base system, and while that seems to understand IPv6 just fine,
> >they couldn't seem to make a connection to any of the official cvsup
> >servers that they tried via IPv6.
> >
> >E.g:  "It looks like cvsup4.freebsd.org is refusing connections
> >       on ipv6 despite it having an AAAA record."
> >
> >Is this expected?
>
> Yes; for now.  Hopefully at some point there will be a IPv6-aware &
> native replacement for cvsupd, and if so, I hope to be the first one
> running it.
If csup is popular and reliable enough, shouldn't we migrate our
infrastructure upon it?  Since it's written in C, csup is much more
portable and transparent to changes of OS.  FreeBSD mirrors running on
non-FreeBSD platforms (like ours) or running on IPv6-only nets will be
relieved from pains of dirty hacks.  I'm not confident enough, but rsync
could be another viable solution.  (Please forgive my short knowledge if
similar effort is already going on.  I'm not actively using FreeBSD any
more these days.)

I just can't understand why the leading operating system for networking
is still relying its update system on such a handicap'ed tool.


J

--
신재호 | Jaeho Shin <[hidden email]> | http://netj.org/

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers

Rudolf Cejka
Jaeho Shin wrote (2008/03/31):
> If csup is popular and reliable enough, shouldn't we migrate our
> infrastructure upon it?  Since it's written in C, csup is much more

If I remember correctly, server part is not sufficiently tested or
rewritten yet.

> I'm not confident enough, but rsync
> could be another viable solution.  (Please forgive my short knowledge if
> similar effort is already going on.  I'm not actively using FreeBSD any
> more these days.)

Rsync is not as good as would be expected: It needs much more memory for
regular updates on server side (for example, one process needs up to
150 MB per one process!) and it is more unstable. There were time periods,
where it was almost impossible to run rsync on full FreeBSD tree without
an internal rsync i/o error. I hope, that it is solved now, but memory
is still the problem (having no time to test 3.0.0 yet).

> I just can't understand why the leading operating system for networking
> is still relying its update system on such a handicap'ed tool.

I can't understand so many other things, especially... ;o)

--
Rudolf Cejka <cejkar at fit.vutbr.cz> http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/~cejkar
Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Information Technology
Bozetechova 2, 612 66  Brno, Czech Republic
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hubs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"