[Bug 738556] Review Request: gogoc - IPv6 TSP client for gogo6

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Feb 14 11:06:15 UTC 2012


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738556

--- Comment #27 from Juan Orti Alcaine <j.orti.alcaine at gmail.com> 2012-02-14 06:06:13 EST ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> 1) gogoc.conf  with "host_type=router"
> 
> a) What happens if radvd is started before gogoc ?
> radvd get killed and gogoc is starting radvd with gogoc-rtadvd.config ?
> This is what i would expect.

If radvd is already running, it's not killed because it can be advertising
another prefix in another interfaces, instead, a new instance is started with
the gogoc specific config.

> b) What happens if gogoc is started before radvd ?
> gogoc-rtadvd get killed and radvd is starting with /etc/radvd.conf ?
> This should not happen ?
> 
> What does this mean for gogoc.service ?
> 
> Should gogoc be started under
> [Unit]
> After=network.target radvd.service

gogoc starts its own radvd, and kills it when closes. Usually, if this is your
only IPv6 connection, you should leave radvd unconfigured and the service
disabled.

You should notice that gogoc doesn't start the radvd.service, the radvd process
is controlled by systemd in the gogoc.service group.


> 2) # rpm -q gogoc
> gogoc-1.2-12.fc16.i686
> 
> gogogc with correct userid and password, the gogockeys.pub is nowhere !
> Somehow it happens that no key is created, no dev tun and no ipv6.

You should add GOGOC_OPTS=-y  to /etc/sysconfig/gogoc to automatically trust
the server keys, that way gogockeys.pub gets populated.
I have decided not to distribute the public keys myself because I have no way
to validate them. Freenet6 is not distributing them in any way, only when you
connect the the servers, so it's up to the user to trust them.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.



More information about the package-review mailing list