Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 19 Jun 2019 16:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:      "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
To:        Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net>
Cc:        "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com>
Subject:   Re: Eliminating IPv6 (?)
Message-ID:  <201906192335.x5JNZkBd020541@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
In-Reply-To: <1633b96e-15ba-9933-abea-46e7b4f0e6a2@grosbein.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 19.06.2019 22:42, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> 
> >> 18.06.2019 10:10, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> >>> How can I turn off IPv6 entirely without rebuilding the kernel?
> >> You cannot. GENERIC kernel specifically enables IPv6 support and you need to disable it at compile time.
> >> And if you do, you better rebuild the world too using WITHOUT_INET6=yes in the /etc/src.conf
> >> or else some utilities compiled with INET6 by default will query kernel
> >> for IPv6-specific data (like routing entries) and complain that your kernel does not know about it.
> > I have not seen these issues, can you give a specific example that fails?
> 
> Other than kernel/userland interaction (that may be not relevant anymore for modern FreeBSD),
> that's basically about making network connections (such as telnet etc.)
> to FQDNs resolved to IPv6 addresses supported by binaries (and resolver being userland beast)
> but not kernel/routing table.
> 
> > A netstat -rn on a v4 only kernel simple reports the v4 table, and iirc a
> > netstat -rn6 returns a "Protocol not supported error" as should all other
> > things.
> >> World built WITHOUT_INET6 has no such rough edges.
> > I find that actually causes me more issues, as then my
> > netstat -rn6 returns a hard error due to:
> >                 case '6':
> > #ifdef INET6
> >                         af = AF_INET6;
> > #else
> >                         errx(1, "IPv6 support is not compiled in");
> > #endif
> 
> Seems very logical to me. Do we have a script in base running "netstat -rn6"
> and breaking on this?


Again, why does it need to be in base?  Since when was that the
standard by which we measure proper function?

Basically the above #else is probably not the best of ideas... silently
ignoring the -6 would of been a more gracefull solution possibly.

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes@freebsd.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201906192335.x5JNZkBd020541>