jhell jhell at dataix.net
Mon Apr 5 13:34:23 UTC 2010

On 04/05/2010 00:21, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 20:13:40 -0700
>> From: Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org>
>> On 04/04/10 02:41, Hiroki Sato wrote:
>>> "Kevin Oberman" <oberman at es.net> wrote
>>>   in <20100404053352.E6F751CC13 at ptavv.es.net>:

> Gentlemen,
> I think this is converging on a good, functional solution. Making
> ipv6_enable="NO" really turn off IPv6 looks like the ideal answer, but I
> think it's up to Hiroki to determine if it is feasible. I did my last
> kernel programming on VMS about 25 years ago and it was in assembly and
> BLISS, not C.
> I am just a bit uncomfortable with the use of the DHCP tag in rc.conf
> to control the use of SLAAC as SLAAC is so different in function and
> capability from DHCPv4, but it's probably the best we can do.
> Thanks to both of you for your attention to this. I think IPv6 is
> critical and anything that makes the transition easier will bear great
> fruit at time goes on.

Not really seeing the correct thread to reply to with this content I
decided to reply to Kevin and lead off from here.

Seeing a lot of *_enable for interfaces makes sense in the traditional
way of configuring daemons or enabling things like rtsold/rtadvd for
IPv6. Don't get me wrong but the below I am not talking about phasing
those _enables out for the daemons.

Personally I believe that using them for such a behavior as configuring
a protocol for a interface is incorrect usage given the current use of
IPv4 and not needing something like ipv4_enable.

Why not skip the need for ipv?_enable all-in-all and leave those out of
the mix?. Since they do not really disable them or enable anything other
than the ability to use and or check ipv6 related daemons.

How about this? (using ath0 as the example interface) and following what
we already do for DHCP on ipv4 interfaces.

ifconfig_ath0_inet6="dead:beef:ffff:1000::1 RTSOL RTADV DHCP"

While right now without inet6 would obviously be ipv4 configured and
when the time comes to switch to IPv6 by default, chop the inet6 into
just inet or inet4. This eventually should lead into a smoother
transition than ipv4_enable ipv6_enable while relieving some of the
checks that to me just seem useless and can be checked for just by the
existance of the above interface with inet6 attached to the end.
Obviously if the configuration line exists then the user wants ipv6
functionality configured so check that line and mark ipv6 enabled.

Maybe its just me but I really think we are trying to check for way to
much here to make it a usable solution for the end user. No offense

PS: I would really love to sort(1) a rc.conf and have ipv4 and ipv6
functionality sorted together by interface but this is not my main goal
by writing this. Same would go for static_routes but that is another story.




More information about the freebsd-current mailing list