User Details
- User Since
- Nov 4 2016, 8:55 AM (474 w, 13 h)
Oct 31 2025
Oct 15 2025
tmp_address = front_config.get('address', None)shouldn't this be listen_address instead of address on line 75?
After my workaround described above:
vyos@vyos# sudo netstat -tulpn | grep 993 tcp 0 0 192.0.2.1:993 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 513 01/haproxy tcp6 0 0 2001:0db8::25:993 :::* LISTEN 784 61/conmon
and then when configuring the other way around:
edit] vyos@vyos# set load-balancing haproxy service wan-993 port 994 [edit] vyos@vyos# commit [edit] vyos@vyos# set load-balancing haproxy service wan-993 port 993 [edit] vyos@vyos# commit [ load-balancing haproxy ] TCP port "993" is used by another service [[load-balancing haproxy]] failed Commit failed [edit] vyos@vyos# sudo netstat -tulpn | grep 993 tcp6 0 0 2001:0db8::25:993 :::* LISTEN 784 61/conmon
Oct 13 2025
Yes I've tested with the latest nightly, the config node didn't exist before.
vyos@vyos# show interfaces pppoe pppoe0 | strip-private
+address dhcpv6
authentication {
password xxxxxx
username xxxxxx
}
dhcpv6-options {
duid xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:12:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:b9:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:94
pd 0 {
interface bond0.1 {
address 1
sla-id 0
}
interface bond0.1001 {
address 1
sla-id 1
}
interface bond0.1002 {
address 1
sla-id 2
}
interface bond0.1003 {
address 1
sla-id 3
}
interface bond0.2001 {
address 1
sla-id 257
}
interface eth2 {
address 1
sla-id 4
}
interface eth3 {
address 1
sla-id 10
}
length 48
}
}
ipv6 {
address {
autoconf
}
}
mtu 1500
no-peer-dns
source-interface bond0.4002
[edit]
vyos@vyos#[ interfaces pppoe pppoe0 ]
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/libexec/vyos/services/vyos-configd", line 156, in run_
script
script.apply(c)
File "/usr/libexec/vyos/conf_mode/interfaces_pppoe.py", line 132,
in apply
p.update(pppoe)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/ifconfig/pppoe.py", lin
e 124, in update
super().update(config)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/ifconfig/interface.py",
line 1831, in update
self.add_addr(addr, vrf_changed=vrf_changed)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/ifconfig/interface.py",
line 1286, in add_addr
elif not is_intf_addr_assigned(self.ifname, addr, netns=netns):
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/utils/network.py", line
454, in is_intf_addr_assigned
if ip_interface(addr) == interface or address == addr:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/usr/lib/python3.11/ipaddress.py", line 117, in ip_interfac
e
raise ValueError(f'{address!r} does not appear to be an IPv4 or
IPv6 interface')
ValueError: 'd' does not appear to be an IPv4 or IPv6 interfaceThis unfortunately doesn't work.
Why is it in the new address node when there is ipv4 address and ipv6 address already? It should be in ipv6 address where the other ipv6 addressing options are too.
Also I get the following error when trying to set it:
script
script.apply(c)
File "/usr/libexec/vyos/conf_mode/interfaces_pppoe.py", line 132,
in apply
p.update(pppoe)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/ifconfig/pppoe.py", lin
e 124, in update
super().update(config)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/ifconfig/interface.py",
line 1831, in update
self.add_addr(addr, vrf_changed=vrf_changed)
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/ifconfig/interface.py",
line 1286, in add_addr
elif not is_intf_addr_assigned(self.ifname, addr, netns=netns):
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/vyos/utils/network.py", line
454, in is_intf_addr_assigned
if ip_interface(addr) == interface or address == addr:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/usr/lib/python3.11/ipaddress.py", line 117, in ip_interfac
e
raise ValueError(f'{address!r} does not appear to be an IPv4 or
IPv6 interface')
ValueError: 'd' does not appear to be an IPv4 or IPv6 interfaceMay 10 2025
Mar 31 2025
Mar 23 2025
Nov 7 2024
Oct 13 2024
Sep 18 2024
So I investigated further and it is like this in jool:
mark is only used to select between pool4 instances.
Sep 3 2024
This made it possible to commit the change
Additionally I set a pbr rule like this:
vyos@vyos# show policy route6
route6 pbr6 {
interface bond0.1001
interface bond0.1002
interface bond0.1003
rule 10 {
destination {
address 64:ff9b::/96
}
set {
mark 1064
}
}
}This should only mark traffic going to the nat64 prefix.
however as far as I can see all traffic is still going through/to jool and the "match mark" is ignored.
Where would I be able to verify if it has been set in the backend configs?
Aug 27 2024
Jul 30 2024
Nov 4 2016
I have a similar problem, since 1.1.7 PFS in phase 2 is not working.
"Oakley Transform [AES_CBC (256), HMAC_SHA2_256, (null)] refused due to strict flag."
As you can see there is no pfs proposal sent by 1.1.7.
The same with a tunnel between 1.1.7 and pfsense 2.3.2.
When activating PFS on both there is no matching proposal, when disabling PFS on pfSense a proposal is found.