On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > I think that the "don't turn on IPv6 by default" measure acts in the > long-term disinterest of Debian's security too. Sure, it's possible Yes, one could say that. And I think I agree with you. > In that scenario, there will be people who say "I want IPv6", and they > can easily turn it on, but because we weren't forced to find and fix > the IPv6 security-related bugs that might be around, they get bitten. Well, I'm quite happy with ipv6 enabled by default (IMHO that's a damn cool goal to shoot for), as long as the required effort is made to *prevent* ipv6 security-related bugs to show up in woody after it is released. This means testing against ipv6 every (priority standard or higher) non-ipv6-patched app/daemon which does ip-level and network-hostname-level access control BEFORE releasing woody, at the very least. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh
Attachment:
pgpLhO0YjNXIb.pgp
Description: PGP signature