From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Oct 7 06:19:53 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D3A13FB79 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 06:19:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@utahime.org) Received: from gate.utahime.jp (gate.utahime.jp [183.180.29.210]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46mr1M2zLHz4KW9 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 06:19:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yasu@utahime.org) Received: from eastasia.home.utahime.org (eastasia.home.utahime.org [192.168.174.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by gate.utahime.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4DAE10965 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 15:19:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (rolling.home.utahime.org [192.168.174.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eastasia.home.utahime.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1608E331D7; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 15:19:39 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.0-rc at eastasia.home.utahime.org Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 15:18:41 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20191007.151841.1094708479149685365.yasu@utahime.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Is IPV6 option still necessary? From: Yasuhiro KIMURA X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 26.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46mr1M2zLHz4KW9 X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of yasu@utahime.org designates 183.180.29.210 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yasu@utahime.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.15 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.26)[-0.265,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:spf-authorized.utahime.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.13)[-0.130,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[utahime.org]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.34)[ip: (0.23), ipnet: 183.180.0.0/16(0.12), asn: 2519(1.37), country: JP(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:2519, ipnet:183.180.0.0/16, country:JP]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 06:19:53 -0000 On October 10, 2012 IPV6 option of all ports was enabled by default. Commit message said "We are in 2012, it is time to activate IPV6 options by default everywhere". And now we are in 2019. IPv6 is more widely used than 2012. So I wonder if IPV6 option is still necessary. If you use official packages then you always use IPv6-enabled binaries. And even if you build packages by yourself you still use IPv6-enabled ones unless you disable IPV6 option. So I think at most only a few people uses IPv6-disabled packages. Are there anybody who still disables IPV6 option for some serious reason such as working around IPv6-related problem? If there aren't then I think it's time to remove IPV6 option from ports framework. Best Regards. --- Yasuhiro KIMURA