Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 12:16:01 -0700 From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> To: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> Cc: FreeBSD-Current List <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: INET6 in world Message-ID: <20030805191601.C8A215D0B@ptavv.es.net> In-Reply-To: Message from Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> of "Tue, 05 Aug 2003 20:52:50 %2B0200." <a06001200bb55ad447e11@[10.0.1.2]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 20:52:50 +0200 > From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be> > Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org > > At 9:37 AM -0700 2003/08/05, David O'Brien wrote: > > > Machanism, not policy. I would also like to run with NO_INET6. IPv6 > > support has done nothing for me other than cause me problems. I still > > strongly disagree with our ordering of localhost in /etc/hosts. My > > system worked worlds better when I put the IPv4 localhost first. > > There is no IPv6 in this house, nor is there likely to be any > time soon. If I can't kill IPv6 from a configuration standpoint, > I'll go ripping out the freakin' code, or I'll use an OS that gives > me the option. I may have missed part of this tread as I am on travel. Why is simply not enabling ipv6 adequate? Note: I DO run IPv6 routinely when at work, so I normally do have it enabled. I'd like to get an understanding of what the issue might be. The point is clearly strongly heald be some reasonably knowledgeable people. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030805191601.C8A215D0B>