From nobody Sat Mar 09 09:37:46 2024
X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
	by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TsHyQ2Sthz5CmfR
	for <freebsd-questions@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org>; Sat,  9 Mar 2024 09:37:50 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ml@netfence.it)
Received: from soth.netfence.it (mailserver.netfence.it [78.134.96.152])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256
	 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256)
	(Client CN "mailserver.netfence.it", Issuer "R3" (verified OK))
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TsHyP6Kjcz4KFw
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Sat,  9 Mar 2024 09:37:49 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from ml@netfence.it)
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org;
	none
Received: from [10.1.2.18] (alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by soth.netfence.it (8.17.2/8.17.2) with ESMTPSA id 4299bkke080161
	(version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO);
	Sat, 9 Mar 2024 10:37:46 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from ml@netfence.it)
X-Authentication-Warning: soth.netfence.it: Host alamar.local.netfence.it [10.1.2.18] claimed to be [10.1.2.18]
Message-ID: <e8f736aa-b9ad-465f-8cac-2b21937d1acd@netfence.it>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 10:37:46 +0100
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-questions
List-Help: <mailto:questions+help@freebsd.org>
List-Post: <mailto:questions@freebsd.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:questions+subscribe@freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:questions+unsubscribe@freebsd.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: ping acting strangely on 13.3
Content-Language: en-US
To: Paul Procacci <pprocacci@gmail.com>
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
References: <c53ff6b9-6183-45a8-be61-f400f466c2d7@netfence.it>
 <CAFbbPugzSeSsxPSv0OtA0P+RAwvFhXio1YUOKzNdxUizzQZdaw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it>
In-Reply-To: <CAFbbPugzSeSsxPSv0OtA0P+RAwvFhXio1YUOKzNdxUizzQZdaw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spamd-Bar: ----
X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action;
	module=replies;
	Message is reply to one we originated
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00];
	REPLY(-4.00)[];
	ASN(0.00)[asn:35612, ipnet:78.134.0.0/17, country:IT]
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TsHyP6Kjcz4KFw

On 3/9/24 04:17, Paul Procacci wrote:

> This is less likely a change to `ping` and more likely a change to the 
> resolver.
>  From ping(8):
> 
> "When invoked with a hostname, the version to which the target is resolved
>       first is used."

I tried following ping with gdb, but I guess I'll need to recompile it 
without optimizations and I'm out of time now.



> If you haven't already, set ipv6_activate_all_interfaces="NO"

Tried setting this and rebooted, but nothing chanegd.
Does it make sense without INET6 in the kernel?



> it makes sense 
> that if there's no transport for ipv6 available, it shouldn't provide 
> you with an answer that requires ipv6.

I opened bug 277592.


  bye & Thanks
	av.