From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Apr  5 06:02:01 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732631065672
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  5 Apr 2010 06:02:01 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no)
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A79568FC18
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  5 Apr 2010 06:02:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 23466 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2010 06:01:58 -0000
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (HELO localhost) (195.1.209.33)
	by bizet.nethelp.no with SMTP; 5 Apr 2010 06:01:58 -0000
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 08:01:58 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <20100405.080158.74730374.sthaug@nethelp.no>
To: dougb@FreeBSD.org
From: 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>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, hrs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ipv6_enable
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 06:02:01 -0000

> >>  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