I'm working on Cacti 1.1.16 on CentOS 7, along with Spine 1.1.16.
I'm happy to see that Cacti (by itself) appears to accept IPv6 addresses - at least if you put them in []. Previously, things didn't seem to work without udp6:[IPv6::addr] as the format, but at least Cacti and cmd.php seem to be fine with using just the brackets.
Unfortunately, I'm running into a case where spine seems to still require the udp6: for me.
I've opened a case on GitHub and have had several exchanges with a (the?) developer, but we haven't come to a consensus. It would appear that spine (for him) works either way. For me, without the udp6:, it collects no data. If I switch to cmd.php (which I'd rather not do but may have to eventually fall back to), the udp6: noted systems do not work, but the just plain [] systems do.
Nobody seems to work properly with just the IPv6 IP (no brackets). This is (mostly) understandable.
I don't see the point in using the actual FQDN for the "Hostname" - using an IP whenever possible removes the need to do any lookups.
I was wondering if this was the case for others or if we could figure out what I'm tripping over. I'm currently testing Cacti 1.1.16, so it's not in production yet (though it is sweeping production equipment). The current target box is a Cisco switch with only IPv6 reachability.
IPv6 Addressing Issues Cacti vs Spine
Moderators: Developers, Moderators
Re: IPv6 Addressing Issues Cacti vs Spine
This is still the case in 1.1.19
Re: IPv6 Addressing Issues Cacti vs Spine
Hello,
With the last version (1.1.38) of Cacti and Spine:
1) cmd.php works fine with IPv6 only host (hostname with only AAAA record)
2) Spine didn't works with IPv6 only host (hostname with only AAAA record)
It's not possible to add anymore udp6: in front of hostname/address as it result of:
"Session SNMP error - SNMP::__construct(): php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Name or service not known"
It's critical to be able to have Spine able to poll IPv6 only host.
I didn't understand why this bug already reported (https://github.com/Cacti/spine/issues/24) didn't have been fixed in 2018.
Many thanks
Nicolas
With the last version (1.1.38) of Cacti and Spine:
1) cmd.php works fine with IPv6 only host (hostname with only AAAA record)
2) Spine didn't works with IPv6 only host (hostname with only AAAA record)
It's not possible to add anymore udp6: in front of hostname/address as it result of:
"Session SNMP error - SNMP::__construct(): php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Name or service not known"
It's critical to be able to have Spine able to poll IPv6 only host.
I didn't understand why this bug already reported (https://github.com/Cacti/spine/issues/24) didn't have been fixed in 2018.
Many thanks
Nicolas
Re: IPv6 Addressing Issues Cacti vs Spine
Because it's more than likely a different bug like https://github.com/Cacti/cacti/issues/1634
Cacti Developer & Release Manager
The Cacti Group
Director
BV IT Solutions Ltd
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Cacti Resources:
Cacti Website (including releases)
Cacti Issues
Cacti Development Releases
Cacti Development Documentation
The Cacti Group
Director
BV IT Solutions Ltd
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Cacti Resources:
Cacti Website (including releases)
Cacti Issues
Cacti Development Releases
Cacti Development Documentation
Re: IPv6 Addressing Issues Cacti vs Spine
It can't be related to this bug because:netniV wrote:Because it's more than likely a different bug like https://github.com/Cacti/cacti/issues/1634
- Spine is not using PHP (bug 1634 is a bug related to PHP)
- Spine require to have hostname with prefix "udp6:" for IPv6 only hostname or IPv6 address as Spine
- It's not possible to use anymore the udp6 workaround by setting udp6: in front of hostname value in Cacti because Cacti didn't handle it correctly anymore (remove udp6: for PHP queries but leave udp6: for Spine. There is no code in Cacti to do this.
Re: IPv6 Addressing Issues Cacti vs Spine
We seem to be duplicating our posts here and the Issues tracker. For now, lets use the Issue tracker https://github.com/Cacti/spine/issues/57
Once we have nailed down the problem we can post back here too. I've explained more on there why I believe this to be more a library issue than a spine issue itself.
Once we have nailed down the problem we can post back here too. I've explained more on there why I believe this to be more a library issue than a spine issue itself.
Cacti Developer & Release Manager
The Cacti Group
Director
BV IT Solutions Ltd
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Cacti Resources:
Cacti Website (including releases)
Cacti Issues
Cacti Development Releases
Cacti Development Documentation
The Cacti Group
Director
BV IT Solutions Ltd
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Cacti Resources:
Cacti Website (including releases)
Cacti Issues
Cacti Development Releases
Cacti Development Documentation
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: anwaraahmad1 and 2 guests