[GH-ISSUE #895] IPv6 nameservers #606

Open
opened 2026-05-05 06:15:56 -06:00 by gitea-mirror · 3 comments
Owner

Originally created by @reinerh on GitHub (Nov 6, 2016).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/895

Hi,

this is not a bug report, just some information about an issue Aidan Gauland reported on the Debian bugtracker.
He was using a firejail sandbox with --net=eth0 and was losing internet connectivity inside the sandbox (but not outside).
We figured out hostname resolution suddenly stopped working. He is using rdnssd on the host, which is a tool that autodiscovers IPv6 nameservers. This was overwriting the resolv.conf with a nameserver detected on the local network.
The content looked like this: nameserver fe80::c6e9:84ff:1234:abcd%eth0
But as there was no eth0 interface inside the sandbox (instead there is a eth0-nnnnn interface), the nameserver was no longer reachable.

He also suggests to document this behavior on the known issues page.

Originally created by @reinerh on GitHub (Nov 6, 2016). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/895 Hi, this is not a bug report, just some information about an issue Aidan Gauland reported on the [Debian bugtracker](https://bugs.debian.org/841760). He was using a firejail sandbox with --net=eth0 and was losing internet connectivity inside the sandbox (but not outside). We figured out hostname resolution suddenly stopped working. He is using rdnssd on the host, which is a tool that autodiscovers IPv6 nameservers. This was overwriting the resolv.conf with a nameserver detected on the local network. The content looked like this: `nameserver fe80::c6e9:84ff:1234:abcd%eth0` But as there was no eth0 interface inside the sandbox (instead there is a eth0-nnnnn interface), the nameserver was no longer reachable. He also suggests to document this behavior on the [known issues page](https://firejail.wordpress.com/support/known-problems/).
gitea-mirror added the
bug
networking
labels 2026-05-05 06:15:56 -06:00
Author
Owner

@netblue30 commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2016):

Thanks, I'll look into it.

<!-- gh-comment-id:258699337 --> @netblue30 commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2016): Thanks, I'll look into it.
Author
Owner

@matu3ba commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2020):

@reinerh @netblue30 Is this still relevant/reproducable or can this be closed?

<!-- gh-comment-id:689199824 --> @matu3ba commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2020): @reinerh @netblue30 Is this still relevant/reproducable or can this be closed?
Author
Owner

@reinerh commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2020):

I would say that's still relevant.

<!-- gh-comment-id:689676150 --> @reinerh commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2020): I would say that's still relevant.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/firejail#606
No description provided.