Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:09:16 -0700 From: christian russell <christian.baltini@gmail.com> To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Eliminating IPv6 (?) Message-ID: <BA89DCE6-4B64-46CC-B94C-AE16AAA5C591@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <18748.1560843874@segfault.tristatelogic.com> References: <18748.1560843874@segfault.tristatelogic.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
My opinion is that being able to practically ignore IPv6, without operational detraction, is a reasonable degree of freedom. FreeBSD isn’t pushing IPv6 any more or less than any other mainstream OSes. Given a set number of developer hours I would prefer that IPv6 be fully implemented and functionally "ignorable" as opposed to dev time being spent allowing an essentially cosmetic opting out of IPv6 functionality. Even more generally I would prefer any dev time time be spent on active issues and new features. > I ask again, is this really such an unreasonable thing to hope for? If I were allocating work-hours on FreeBSD development my answer would be: “yup" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Christian > On Jun 18, 2019, at 12:44 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg@tristatelogic.com> wrote: > > In message <d6a5d6b8-1630-3095-dd0b-22b49213176e@grosbein.net>, > Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> wrote: > >> 18.06.2019 10:10, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> >>> How can I turn off IPv6 entirely without rebuilding the kernel? >> >> You cannot. GENERIC kernel specifically enables IPv6 support and you need to >> disable it at compile time. >> And if you do, you better rebuild the world too using WITHOUT_INET6=yes in the >> /etc/src.conf >> or else some utilities compiled with INET6 by default will query kernel >> for IPv6-specific data (like routing entries) and complain that your kernel does >> not know about it. >> >> World built WITHOUT_INET6 has no such rough edges. > > OK, so I obviously expressed myself badly. Let me try again. > > IPv6 support is enabled in a the stock kernel. OK. Fine. But just because > that feature is present in the kernel, that does not imply that anything in > userland -has- to actually make any use of it at all. > > *Something* is doing ifconfig on my loopback (lo0) interface. What is that > thing and how can I get it to stop doing that? > > As I have already learned, the /etc/rc.firewall script also assumes both the > presence of, and the desirability of IPv6 support. And unless one edits that > file manually... which I have been effectively forced to do... there is no way > to get it to simply NOT create and install multiple IPv6-related ipfw rules, > EVEN THOUGH in my particular situation... which is still the most common case... > those extra and entirely superfluous IPv6 ipfw filtering rules are serving > no earthly purpose whatsoever and are only cluttering up my ipfw rule set, > thus pointlessly making it harder for me to grok and maintain them all. > > Clearly, if doesn't have to be this way. Some maintainers just decided that > I and all other IPv4-only users should get stuck dealing with a lot of useless, > unnecessary and distracting IPv6 stuff, whether I like it or not, and presumably > for our own good. > > I really wish that maintainers would allow me a bit more freedom, and show > me the courtesy and respect to allow me to decide for myself what is and what > isn't "for my own good". > > I can and will most certainly get down and grovel around in the various > /etc/rc.d/ scripts and will comment out those parts that do things like > ifconfig'ing my loopback interface for IPv6, whether I like it or not. > But there ought to be some single /etc/rc.conf variable via which one could > simply select the "No, I don't want to have to deal with IPv6 at all right > now" option. > > Is that really an unreasonable hope, expectation, and request? > > I understand that the kernel will still -offer- the IPv6 support. But if no > -other- software on my system actually takes the kernel up on that offer, > then the kernel's IPv6 support becomes like the tree that falls in the > forrest when there is nobody around to hear it. It might as well be said > that it makes no sound, and no difference to anything at all. > > It is clearly not necessary for me or anyone else to have to rebuild the > kernel... *and* world... just in order to get rid of what are, for the > majority of users here in 2019, still a bunch of utterly superfluous IPv6 > "features" that (a) do not help us one iota and that (b) are all just a > big and pointless distraction that muddles everything and unnecessarily > complicates and complexifies ordinary system maintenance tasks. > > IPv6 is great and I'm sure I'll be using it someday. But today is not that > day... not for me, and also not for one hell of a lot of other users. The > fact that I and others are effectively being forced to even think about it, > due to an absence of reasonable and easily accessible userland options, is > actually a big turn-off, and leaves a bad taste in the mouth which will > be remembered, in future, at every mention of IPv6. I hope that all of the > IPv6 evanglists will take a moment to stop and think about that, and that > they'll stop effectively forcing those of us who don't need it to both use > IPv6 and to think about it, whether we like it or not, and before we are ready, > willing, and able to do so. > > > Regards, > rfg > > > P.S. In case I have again failed to be clear, I am proposing a new /etc/rc.conf > option. Something simple and intutive like: > > ipv6="NO" > > That in turn should be checked -and- respected by all relevant /etc/rc,d/ > scripts. > > I ask again, is this really such an unreasonable thing to hope for? > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BA89DCE6-4B64-46CC-B94C-AE16AAA5C591>