The basic idea is that we want to make sure that either there's no
IPv6 at all, or IPv6 works fine.
where by fine you actually mean something much stronger:
IPv6 at least as good as IPv4
Okay, let's consider people who want IPv6 but (for whatever reason)
cannot ensure that their IPv6 is
There are excellent reasons why IPv6 is preferred to IPv4 by
default, and this is not going to change.
I'm very interested in this! What are the reasons?
The basic idea is that we want to make sure that either there's no IPv6
at all, or IPv6 works fine. This is important, since it's easy
Tagging the bug as wontfix.
Aurélien,
You've tagged this bug as ``wontfix'' after I renamed it to
gai.conf difficult to find
While I fully agree with you that the current default should remain,
I still think we should point users at gai.conf in a more visible
manner.
Do I have your
tag 268631 - wontfix
thanks
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:03:22PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Tagging the bug as wontfix.
Aurélien,
You've tagged this bug as ``wontfix'' after I renamed it to
gai.conf difficult to find
While I fully agree with you that the current default
Barak A. Pearlmutter ba...@cs.nuim.ie wrote:
Hi,
For the next few years at least, when both are available, IPv4 will
typically be faster and more reliable than IPv6. That is the world we
are living in.
In the world I live in, my ISP was among the very first here to deploy
native IPv6 on DSL
In the world I live in, my ISP was among the very first here to
deploy native IPv6 on DSL *years* ago and is actively seeking IPv6
peering opportunities with as many networks as possible.
That is great. Do they artificially slow down IPv4 in order to ensure
that IPv6 is faster?
IPv6
Barak A. Pearlmutter ba...@cs.nuim.ie wrote:
Hi,
In the world I live in, my ISP was among the very first here to
deploy native IPv6 on DSL *years* ago and is actively seeking IPv6
peering opportunities with as many networks as possible.
That is great. Do they artificially slow down IPv4 in
Please understand, I'm a big IPv6 advocate. I use it on all my own
machines. It is deployed on some local networks I use. There is
extraordinarily strong IPv6 expertise here. The guy who maintains our
network (David Malone) literally wrote the book on IPv6 network
administration. The host
Barak A. Pearlmutter ba...@cs.nuim.ie wrote:
Please understand, I'm a big IPv6 advocate.
I wouldn't have guessed. I think it showed, didn't it?
administration. The host ftp.ie.debian.org is centrally hosted at
heanet.ie, which is a centre for IPv6 deployment and expertise, a
sixxs tunnel
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 07:40:49PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
... Google is fully IPv6-enabled
Sort of. I've used http://ipv6.google.com/. But Google has IPv6
disabled at the DNS level for www.google.com, albeit perhaps only for
some requests. Watch:
WRONG:
$ host -t
Given the problem you point out with this particular host, it's quite
ironic, isn't it? What about getting them to fix it?
...
Maybe it's because people complain on the BTS that IPv6 is preferred
over IPv4 by default and this causes issues with ftp.ie.debian.org
instead of telling the folks
They may do that based on geodns, but at least it is done for some
subnet including mine.
Huh. Why do you suppose Google would do such an odd thing?
--Barak.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
... It doesn't belong in APT, it should be a global, system-wide
preference. I don't feel like adjusting the preferences of every
single network program whenever I switch from a good IPv6 to a bad
IPv6 network.
I absolutely agree.
Barak: if IPv6 is much slower than IPv4, please adjust the
reassign 268631 libc6
retitle 268631 gai.conf difficult to find
severity 268631 minor
thanks
Barak: if IPv6 is much slower than IPv4, please adjust the
preferences in /etc/gai.conf. Just say
precedence :::0:0/96 100
That configuration file is impossible for non-super-uber-expert
severity 268631 wishlist
tag 268631 + wontfix
thanks
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:59:16AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
... It doesn't belong in APT, it should be a global, system-wide
preference. I don't feel like adjusting the preferences of every
single network program whenever I
There are excellent reasons why IPv6 is preferred to IPv4 by
default, and this is not going to change.
I'm very interested in this! What are the reasons?
(The only serious argument I've heard boils down to: some IPv4 setups
are broken by NAT and icky firewalls, and IPv6 isn't. One
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 06:36:49PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
(The only serious argument I've heard boils down to: some IPv4 setups
are broken by NAT and icky firewalls, and IPv6 isn't. One non-serious
argument I've heard is: if IPv6 is not preferred then the v6 network
will not get
Yes, let's deploy IPv6, but also make sure that nobody use it!
If I understand what you're saying correctly, in essence, you feel sad
inside when two IPv6-enabled hosts communicate using IPv4.
That is not a technical argument.
For the next few years at least, when both are available, IPv4 will
v4 is much faster on this route than v6. I suspect this is typical of
IPv6-enabled machines, and will remain so for at least ten years.
Please do not do that in APT. It doesn't belong in APT, it should be
a global, system-wide preference. I don't feel like adjusting the
preferences of every
19 matches
Mail list logo
