Re: defaulting to net.ipv6.bindv6only=1 for squeeze
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: defaulting to net.ipv6.bindv6only=1 for squeeze
- From: "Bernhard R. Link" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:10:41 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20100103101041.GA19891@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de>
- Mail-followup-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <20091230093712.GA15314@bongo.bofh.it>
- References: <20091024182431.GB13333@bongo.bofh.it> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20091226024308.GA11504@roeckx.be> <email@example.com> <20091229173718.GA28130@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de> <20091229182540.GF20379@decadent.org.uk> <20091230090754.GA32505@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de> <20091230093712.GA15314@bongo.bofh.it>
* Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> [091230 10:37]:
> On Dec 30, "Bernhard R. Link" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > > I routinely blacklist the ipv6 module. There are far too many
> > > > programs breaking or doing stuff I do not want if it is loaded.
> I call bullshit on this.
You can call bullshit whatever how often you want. That does not change
that many people have had those problems and thus have ipv6 backlisted
(or not even compiled in if they have their own kernels built) and
programs not working with that are broken.
> > a) netstat garbling the addresses of connected endpoints
> This is one of the reasons why bindv6only should be set.
I'm not arguing about bindv6only. I'm only arguing programs should work
without ipv6 loaded.
> >  which not only pesters the root servers with questions for the
> > top-level domain "$(hostname -s)",
> Not really.
Try to look at the outgoing dns queries. As I said I did not retest
everything all the time. At least with etch that was still very common.
And even with lenny there are still programs needlessly sending AAAA
queries. (Though the only one I can name is apt, which even does so
without ipv6 module loaded).
Bernhard R. Link