Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2019 22:14:04 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> To: "Rick Macklem" <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Cc: "Mihir Luthra" <luthramihir708@gmail.com>, "Hiroki Sato" <hrs@allbsd.org>, freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, hrs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rpc.statd already ipv6 clean? Message-ID: <F1F47B57-8491-47E8-A144-6CD75193FFAF@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <YTOPR0101MB11631BCBCA27985AC11FC104DD810@YTOPR0101MB1163.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> References: <CAEa=dYAEKph9qOcegtEB%2BFXCMqdQpmbrbzOA548cvjk0L3KK4A@mail.gmail.com> <20190925.085753.1800759957383540219.hrs@allbsd.org> <CAEa=dYAnwxPjwZozU6K3GE7-Cjwx0rSemVd0ihrbUAUQw3jOLg@mail.gmail.com> <20190926.054603.242590258844901628.hrs@allbsd.org> <CAEa=dYCv=b7JxW4Ajc%2BgBNaC7z_SEiUhwyPz5vxjUNdkzvVmHQ@mail.gmail.com> <YTOPR0101MB1163687D58A2AEED58AECE21DD860@YTOPR0101MB1163.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <CAEa=dYBoy7ZLDTFV62_dqFeMnc3jmATaq%2BkvYgYvOXzEYaLz=A@mail.gmail.com> <YTOPR0101MB11631BCBCA27985AC11FC104DD810@YTOPR0101MB1163.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27 Sep 2019, at 21:52, Rick Macklem wrote: > Mihir Luthra wrote: >> Hi Rick, >> Rick wrote: >>> Although I'll admit it isn't something I am particularily fond of, >>> FreeBSD likes >>> utilities to build/work with only one of ipv4/ipv6. >>> To do this, "#ifdef INET" and "#ifdef INET6" is applied to the code >>> and the >>> Makefile is tweaked to define one or both of these. >>> (You can look at usr.sbin/nfsuserd for an example of this.) >> >> Yes I see. Although I was thinking, wouldn't it be better if we can >> take a flag via >getopts for ipv6/ipv4 if the machine supports both >> with macro guards around >too? > bz@ is the guy to ask. I've cc'd him. We are also exchanging private emails currently to sort out the confusion between “compiling out”, transport protocol, and addresses/protocol carried inside the (RPC) packets. This is three different things and all should be sorted. My work is mostly on the “compiling out” as I don’t want/need INET anymore mostly. Ensuring that the transport protocol works dual-stack is a good, easier part. For RPC and some others making sure to be able to not only transport IPv4 addresses in the payload protocol but also IPv6 addresses can be the hard part. I assume the latter is what you were referring to in the lines below? >> Btw, these protocols are old Sun Microsystems ones without any >> published >> RFC, so what is "correct" is difficult to determine. I suppose the >> Open >> Solaris sources is the best protocol specification. (Interop. testing >> with Linux >> would be nice, since Linux is the "defacto standard" now.) >> >> Good luck with it, rick >> >> Thanks for the tips, >> Mihir > rick
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F1F47B57-8491-47E8-A144-6CD75193FFAF>