Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Jun 2019 10:33:26 +0200
From:      Marek Zarychta <zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl>
To:        christian russell <christian.baltini@gmail.com>, "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Eliminating IPv6 (?)
Message-ID:  <f0bcb169-9afd-4f68-34bb-9f85f445c9bd@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl>
In-Reply-To: <BA89DCE6-4B64-46CC-B94C-AE16AAA5C591@gmail.com>
References:  <18748.1560843874@segfault.tristatelogic.com> <BA89DCE6-4B64-46CC-B94C-AE16AAA5C591@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--y82voBVt9gqr51QdkbZu1xABDhKCgtYM6
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="BfDSwDzC7bR85rPfzkw1pWXvCEn7cc9TH";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Marek Zarychta <zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl>
To: christian russell <christian.baltini@gmail.com>,
 "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <f0bcb169-9afd-4f68-34bb-9f85f445c9bd@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl>
Subject: Re: Eliminating IPv6 (?)
References: <18748.1560843874@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
 <BA89DCE6-4B64-46CC-B94C-AE16AAA5C591@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BA89DCE6-4B64-46CC-B94C-AE16AAA5C591@gmail.com>

--BfDSwDzC7bR85rPfzkw1pWXvCEn7cc9TH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US


W dniu 18.06.2019 o=C2=A010:09, christian russell pisze:
> My opinion is that being able to practically ignore IPv6, without opera=
tional detraction, is a reasonable degree of freedom.  FreeBSD isn=E2=80=99=
t pushing IPv6 any more or less than any other mainstream OSes.
>
> Given a set number of developer hours I would prefer that IPv6 be fully=
 implemented and functionally "ignorable" as opposed to dev time being sp=
ent allowing an essentially cosmetic opting out of IPv6 functionality.  E=
ven more generally I would prefer any dev time time be spent on active is=
sues and new features.
>
>> I ask again, is this really such an unreasonable thing to hope for?
> If I were allocating work-hours on FreeBSD development my answer would =
be:  =E2=80=9Cyup"  =C2=AF\_(=E3=83=84)_/=C2=AF
>
> Christian

Dual stack support looks like a reasonable solution these days and works
fine in 99% of network scenarios. From the other hand the ability to
completely disable legacy IP should be considered as well. Some people
consider IPv6 only network to be providing a sufficient degree of
freedom but in 2019 we still lack DHCPv6 client in base.

--=20
Marek Zarychta

>
>> On Jun 18, 2019, at 12:44 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg@tristatelogic.c=
om> wrote:
>>
>> In message <d6a5d6b8-1630-3095-dd0b-22b49213176e@grosbein.net>,=20
>> Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> wrote:
>>
>>> 18.06.2019 10:10, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>>>
>>>> How can I turn off IPv6 entirely without rebuilding the kernel?
>>> You cannot. GENERIC kernel specifically enables IPv6 support and you =
need to
>>> disable it at compile time.
>>> And if you do, you better rebuild the world too using WITHOUT_INET6=3D=
yes in the
>>> /etc/src.conf
>>> or else some utilities compiled with INET6 by default will query kern=
el
>>> for IPv6-specific data (like routing entries) and complain that your =
kernel does=20
>>> not know about it.
>>>
>>> World built WITHOUT_INET6 has no such rough edges.
>> OK, so I obviously expressed myself badly.  Let me try again.
>>
>> IPv6 support is enabled in a the stock kernel.  OK.  Fine.  But just b=
ecause
>> that feature is present in the kernel, that does not imply that anythi=
ng in
>> userland -has- to actually make any use of it at all.
>>
>> *Something* is doing ifconfig on my loopback (lo0) interface.  What is=
 that
>> thing and how can I get it to stop doing that?
>>
>> As I have already learned, the /etc/rc.firewall script also assumes bo=
th the
>> presence of, and the desirability of IPv6 support.  And unless one edi=
ts that
>> file manually... which I have been effectively forced to do... there i=
s no way
>> to get it to simply NOT create and install multiple IPv6-related ipfw =
rules,
>> EVEN THOUGH in my particular situation... which is still the most comm=
on case...
>> those extra and entirely superfluous IPv6 ipfw filtering rules are ser=
ving
>> no earthly purpose whatsoever and are only cluttering up my ipfw rule =
set,
>> thus pointlessly making it harder for me to grok and maintain them all=
=2E
>>
>> Clearly, if doesn't have to be this way.  Some maintainers just decide=
d that
>> I and all other IPv4-only users should get stuck dealing with a lot of=
 useless,
>> unnecessary and distracting IPv6 stuff, whether I like it or not, and =
presumably
>> for our own good.
>>
>> I really wish that maintainers would allow me a bit more freedom, and =
show
>> me the courtesy and respect to allow me to decide for myself what is a=
nd what
>> isn't "for my own good".
>>
>> I can and will most certainly get down and grovel around in the variou=
s
>> /etc/rc.d/ scripts and will comment out those parts that do things lik=
e
>> ifconfig'ing my loopback interface for IPv6, whether I like it or not.=

>> But there ought to be some single /etc/rc.conf variable via which one =
could
>> simply select the "No, I don't want to have to deal with IPv6 at all r=
ight
>> now" option.
>>
>> Is that really an unreasonable hope, expectation, and request?
>>
>> I understand that the kernel will still -offer- the IPv6 support. But =
if no
>> -other- software on my system actually takes the kernel up on that off=
er,
>> then the kernel's IPv6 support becomes like the tree that falls in the=

>> forrest when there is nobody around to hear it.  It might as well be s=
aid
>> that it makes no sound, and no difference to anything at all.
>>
>> It is clearly not necessary for me or anyone else to have to rebuild t=
he
>> kernel... *and* world... just in order to get rid of what are, for the=

>> majority of users here in 2019, still a bunch of utterly superfluous I=
Pv6
>> "features" that (a) do not help us one iota and that (b) are all just =
a
>> big and pointless distraction that muddles everything and unnecessaril=
y
>> complicates and complexifies ordinary system maintenance tasks.
>>
>> IPv6 is great and I'm sure I'll be using it someday.  But today is not=
 that
>> day... not for me, and also not for one hell of a lot of other users. =
 The
>> fact that I and others are effectively being forced to even think abou=
t it,
>> due to an absence of reasonable and easily accessible userland options=
, is
>> actually a big turn-off, and leaves a bad taste in the mouth which wil=
l
>> be remembered, in future, at every mention of IPv6.  I hope that all o=
f the
>> IPv6 evanglists will take a moment to stop and think about that, and t=
hat
>> they'll stop effectively forcing those of us who don't need it to both=
 use
>> IPv6 and to think about it, whether we like it or not, and before we a=
re ready,
>> willing, and able to do so.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> rfg
>>
>>
>> P.S.  In case I have again failed to be clear, I am proposing a new /e=
tc/rc.conf
>> option.  Something simple and intutive like:
>>
>>    ipv6=3D"NO"
>>
>> That in turn should be checked -and- respected by all relevant /etc/rc=
,d/
>> scripts.
>>
>> I ask again, is this really such an unreasonable thing to hope for?
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"=

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>


--BfDSwDzC7bR85rPfzkw1pWXvCEn7cc9TH--

--y82voBVt9gqr51QdkbZu1xABDhKCgtYM6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEMOqvKm6wKvS1/ZeCdZ/s//1SjSwFAl0Iod0ACgkQdZ/s//1S
jSwZvwf/agEmz2iZbmOJQGdC5jiR5/Gd3VXDj4XI2XtHXcc1btqowrmaPB4gEREn
6lMihXMMM3p4FWoO6W87AuoNcxiX3vnkdGre/K+m19tuPLybDryXl11C7FZOSXrS
0TYgPapR+uyhBhs3j4MLxOn2HLgWpwOFXfOUc/gb2LKTIFGySEllgbbv5iQL+tFC
DVzwLyHGBp7anwK3DDWYICSyyxpoDR6onYU0sZeuGO/UN9FruJRQW3b8WoDKgAyh
/FtSPSbE83R3Ut3c+LiF3nDBiPkqzxVmYHCYSBLAiLfZmKMw40mFSXAsWeWIrL1L
bpaxFwRIf9kHu//dVGVafelanAWWDg==
=qhLx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--y82voBVt9gqr51QdkbZu1xABDhKCgtYM6--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f0bcb169-9afd-4f68-34bb-9f85f445c9bd>