Forward: HEADS UP! Default value of ip6_v6only changed

[Michael Nottebrock]

Christian Weisgerber wrote:

> If we ship with a default of v6only off, then people will
> not fix software to open two sockets.  This in turn means that
> turning v6only on will break this software. 

I find the notion of making people "fix" their software to not rely on 
RFC-defined behaviour problematic. I'm actually glad to see NetBSD reversed 
their unfortunate decision regarding the default (and OpenBSD's stunt of not 
even providing a knob is very evil indeed).

> I understand that itojun would like to see this aspect of RFC2553
> amended.  I don't know what the prospects of this happening are on
> the IETF level.

Not too bad, IMHO. The IETF really is the place for this decision to be made 
and the knob should reflect current standards. Flipping the default when a 
revised RFC is published would be the right thing to do.

-- 
    ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi at freebsd.org
  (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
    \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20031029/3144115e/attachment.bin