Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 08:01:58 +0200 (CEST) From: sthaug@nethelp.no To: dougb@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, hrs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ipv6_enable Message-ID: <20100405.080158.74730374.sthaug@nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <4BB955EB.9090000@FreeBSD.org> References: <20100404.184141.03733377.hrs@allbsd.org> <20100404.115158.74708010.sthaug@nethelp.no> <4BB955EB.9090000@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> No, my intension is not to compare IPv4 and IPv6 here. We have never > >> enable L3 address autoconfiguration without explicit configuration > >> before. This is reasonable and should be kept for IPv6, too. > > > > Agree 100%. Having IPv6 SLAAC as the default is a bad idea. > > > > On the other hand, I *do* like a single rc.conf knob (ipv6_enable) for > > the top level IPv6 functionality - even if it doesn't do a 100% job. > > Thanks for your response. Do you think the compromise that I suggested > in my response to Kevin, enabling SLAAC for the interface if DHCP is in > use for IPv4 is reasonable? I think this is reasonable. However, I think it would also be worth while to revisit this point when DHCPv6 has evolved to do a more complete job (like assign a default gateway). Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100405.080158.74730374.sthaug>