Bug#727708: init system thoughts
Oh, sorry, I forgot to respond to this part.
Steve Langasek <email@example.com> writes:
> Of course if we were writing all our services according to best
> practices, we wouldn't have to worry about this, as the service would
> just handle this gracefully (or maybe hand the complexity off to the
> init system for socket-based activation - but then what does init do
> with a request for a socket address that's not available?
This is what IP_FREEBIND is for, which is why it needs to be supported by
the socket activation configuration. It's been considered best practice
for some time for IPv6 services binding to particular configured IP
addresses to use IP_FREEBIND because IPv6 network setup can take an
unpredictable amount of time.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>