From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Jan 7 08:48:49 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E63E7A61A58 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:48:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailinglists@toco-domains.de) Received: from toco-domains.de (mail.toco-domains.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:150:50a5::6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B35671D08; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:48:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailinglists@toco-domains.de) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (mail.toco-domains.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:150:50a5::6]) by toco-domains.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CDCE21B22063; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:48:47 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Impact of missing IPv6 support on portstree To: Mark Felder , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <5655B1CD.4050009@toco-domains.de> <56712BFA.9030202@toco-domains.de> <1452109905.2214619.484784714.3E332B18@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Torsten Zuehlsdorff Message-ID: <568E266F.6090906@toco-domains.de> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:48:47 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1452109905.2214619.484784714.3E332B18@webmail.messagingengine.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 08:48:50 -0000 On 06.01.2016 20:51, Mark Felder wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015, at 03:16, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: >> >> In conclusion: if you having an IPv6 only machine, you could not build >> 69.4 % of the ports. > > distcache.freebsd.org is reachable over IPv6. Distfiles should *still* > be fetchable over IPv6, but I don't know if there are edge cases where > distfiles aren't cached eg due to the MASTER_SITES being CHEESESHOP > (pypi), etc. Therefore i wrote: "To check if a port is available for IPv6 i excluded the distcache.freebsd.org host, because it is not part of the port." Distcache is part of the infrastructure of FreeBSD. But it is just a workaround for missing IPv6 support with a different set of problems and requirements. If i don't use the ports-tree, for example because of building development versions i am still hit by this issue. It is also often a time-issue. If there is a port with a security issue i upgrade it immediately. In this case the distfile is normally not in distcache. Yes, we could possibly argue that the impact at the ports-tree is much less, because of the distcache-workaround. But it is a workaround and not intended to fix the IPv6 issues. It is sponsored and there is no guarantee of uptime. This servers can went away anytime. Also it is just a mask for the basic problem. IPv6 exists for 15 years, IPv4 addresses are nearly exhausted and IPv6-only connections increases rapidly, while many services are not reachable via IPv6. Therefore we need more persons to be aware of this problem. Greetings, Torsten