From owner-freebsd-current Wed Jan 5 12:52:59 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.arch.bellsouth.net (ns1.arch.bellsouth.net [205.152.173.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217E5158D9; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 12:52:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ck@ns1.arch.bellsouth.net) Received: (from ck@localhost) by ns1.arch.bellsouth.net (8.9.1a/goaway) id PAA23691; Wed, 5 Jan 2000 15:52:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 15:52:09 -0500 From: Christian Kuhtz To: Kai Voigt Cc: "Louis A. Mamakos" , committers@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.0 code freeze scheduled for Jan 15th Message-ID: <20000105155209.J22835@ns1.arch.bellsouth.net> References: <28153.947101446@zippy.cdrom.com> <200001052026.PAA61728@whizzo.transsys.com> <20000105213930.C751@abc.123.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95i In-Reply-To: <20000105213930.C751@abc.123.org>; from Kai Voigt on Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 09:39:30PM +0100 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 09:39:30PM +0100, Kai Voigt wrote: > > Will we try to include the remaining KAME IPv6 integration into 4.0 before > > the freeze? It would be nice to have 4.0 with a functioning IPv6 stack and > > some applications. > > IPv6 is a very complex area and I believe that a -RELEASE should come with > both a clean IPv6 stack and working userland tools. When looking at > Linux and Solaris, they also lack a usable IPv6 support when it comes > to userland tools. Really. IPv6 code is in the 2.2 release & 2.3 development kernels (albeit flagged as experimental). And works quite well, and is being used on the 6bone and other IPv6 testbeds. So, what exactly do you mean with your statement? Would you care to qualify your remark? I don't consider it fair to throw Solaris into the mix isn't fair because it's a different beast considering the availability and maintenance of the source. You're comparing apples with oranges here. Nobody expects IPv6 to be particularly pretty, but it needs to make it into the regular tree. Why not for the 4.0 release. For example, Cisco's IPv6 IOS train isn't pretty, but it works. And has been brought up to their most current code train almost a year ago, if I recall correctly. If it doesn't get in now, it will be a very long time before a major release will come about. And it's not going to get any prettier if nobody has exposure to it. > I doubt that IPv6 will make it into 4.0-RELEASE, but I'm sure it > will be a major item for this year. I think that's not good enough. Nobody says it has to be turned on by default, but it needs to make it into the train as a regular component to allow it to get more exposure. Cheers, Chris -- Christian Kuhtz Architecture, BellSouth.net -wk, -hm Atlanta, GA "Speaking for myself only." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message