Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:06:42 +0900 From: Jaeho Shin <netj@sparcs.org> To: Peter Losher <Peter_Losher@isc.org> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, hubs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPv6 and cvsup servers Message-ID: <20080331110642.GC24282@netj.org> In-Reply-To: <47F08C13.20307@isc.org> References: <p06240800c41624e8e526@[128.113.24.47]> <47F08C13.20307@isc.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--iFRdW5/EC4oqxDHL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 00:00:35 -0700, Peter Losher wrote: [...] > Correct cvsup/cvsupd are written in Modula3, which doesn't know anything= =20 > about IPv6 (and I am pretty certain that it likely never will) cvsup2.kr.freebsd.org is running on a Debian 4.0 amd64 system, and cvsupd is really a huge pain for us. We are using some ancient cvsup/cvsupd i386 .deb packages with old i386 C, M3, and X libraries installed separately. Those cvsup packages even disapeared from Debian experimental, perhaps a few years ago. I haven't tried CM3 or other compilers instead of ezm3 yet, but neither are they available on Debian. CVSup seems to have no future, so putting any effort into it seemed pointless. >=20 > >So they went to use the csup program in > >the base system, and while that seems to understand IPv6 just fine, > >they couldn't seem to make a connection to any of the official cvsup > >servers that they tried via IPv6. > > > >E.g: "It looks like cvsup4.freebsd.org is refusing connections > > on ipv6 despite it having an AAAA record." > > > >Is this expected? >=20 > Yes; for now. Hopefully at some point there will be a IPv6-aware &=20 > native replacement for cvsupd, and if so, I hope to be the first one=20 > running it. If csup is popular and reliable enough, shouldn't we migrate our infrastructure upon it? Since it's written in C, csup is much more portable and transparent to changes of OS. FreeBSD mirrors running on non-FreeBSD platforms (like ours) or running on IPv6-only nets will be relieved from pains of dirty hacks. I'm not confident enough, but rsync could be another viable solution. (Please forgive my short knowledge if similar effort is already going on. I'm not actively using FreeBSD any more these days.) I just can't understand why the leading operating system for networking is still relying its update system on such a handicap'ed tool. J --=20 =EC=8B=A0=EC=9E=AC=ED=98=B8 | Jaeho Shin <netj@sparcs.org> | http://netj.or= g/ --iFRdW5/EC4oqxDHL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH8MXCeGASkZ411HcRAgeTAKDOLPB2gkXBp4pY/2yYqdXmCk2TegCdGpWl qv/5TenNuxzkNXhcu8z9sAE= =dMkR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iFRdW5/EC4oqxDHL--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080331110642.GC24282>