Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 18:37:30 +0100 From: Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org> To: Pouria Mousavizadeh Tehrani <pouria@FreeBSD.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Olivier_Cochard-Labb=C3=A9?= <olivier@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: we should enable RFC7217 by default Message-ID: <80344ea0-02fb-486c-817a-6c69094d8655@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4a83b581-1960-48b5-a589-ee47d85e8f18@FreeBSD.org> References: <9cda2fbc-b8fb-44d1-8c1f-88395d741af7@FreeBSD.org> <CA%2Bq%2BTcp0E4-OL%2BTzCwaqaKDqPMG85PpG5m=rkpN7O6pWhroAxA@mail.gmail.com> <4a83b581-1960-48b5-a589-ee47d85e8f18@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 1/27/26 22:15, Pouria Mousavizadeh Tehrani wrote: > On 1/27/26 4:56 PM, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: >> In a server environment, administrators typically assign static IPv6 >> addresses manually and do not use the EUI-64 method. > To add a note, administrators usually avoid *using* EUI-64 addresses for > production, especially for their DNS records. > However, they often have an EUI-64 address because having default routes > and other parameters automatically configured by accept_rtadv is > convenient. > That's why I believe there will be an impact on servers. however, as you > said, it's not an issue here. > > At least, we use accept_rtadv in our production AND people typically > configure their rtadvd with the autonomous bit. So this results in > having EUI-64 addresses on the servers, which may be used in source > selection. > > I would like to kindly request @madpilot to create this patch for > review, including a note in the UPDATING file, if everyone is in agreement. > I will create a review with this changes soon. But at present my priority is getting the feature MFCed to stable/15 -- Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org>home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?80344ea0-02fb-486c-817a-6c69094d8655>