[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#560238: tech-ctte: Default value for net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl

Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> writes:
> * Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) [100622 01:21]:

>> Having a different default on BSD than on other platforms strikes me as
>> asking for trouble (in particular, asking for obscure portability
>> issues to BSD systems that most developers don't test on).

> I agree with you. However, I currently view the BSD platforms as
> "addon", i.e. I don't think we should do for our linux platforms a
> different decision just because kBSD exists.

Oh, I agree with that part.  The only point that I was driving at is that
I think an implication of saying the default should be 0 is that we're
asking the kFreeBSD porters to change their default as well, and we should
probably ensure that they're aware of the decision and the reasoning.

> Of course, this calls for changing the default on kBSD - but this is the
> second step IMHO, not the first step. And I would like to keep that
> decision with the kBSD porters unless someone puts that question in
> front of us (i.e. I don't believe we need or should answer that question
> within this request).

If we're taking that approach, we should be very explicit here:

>>> Having said this, I would like to call for an vote with the options
>>> A set net.ipv6.bindv6only to 0
>>> B set net.ipv6.bindv6only to 1
>>> C further discussion

that we're only talking about the Linux kernel Debian architectures.

> Hm. As it currently looks to me, the decision was delegated to us. If
> Marco removes that delegation, that'd be fine with me. If not, we need
> to make a decision (at least I believe it's sensible to not wait until
> someone just does it for us).

Oh, okay, I had missed that side of things.  I'm certainly fine with us
making a decision that was delegated to us.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: