On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 04:23:34PM +0200, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > I don't oppose disabling this – quite the contrary: I'd rather avoid > dhcpcd falling back to IPv4LL if dhcpcd fails at getting a response > from DHCPv4; I'd rather have it background its IPv4 process and retry > DHCPv4 at regular intervals, just like dhclient does.
Uff. I hadn't even considered that aspect yet. Yeah this would get people fuming :D > However, I'm not entirely convinced that we can presume IPv6LL to be > available at all times. I welcome opinions on this specific point. The way I see it IPv4LL was never widely adopted (by applications) in the first place due to only showing up when there's network problems already. OTOH IPv6 LLs are always there where applications can use them unless users intervene with ill-advised disablement of IPv6. It seems Windows supports 4LL out of the box (I didn't know that), but it also does 6LLs. So no problem there. I'm not sure about Mac and Linux Desktops (using NM). sd-networkd supports them but they are off by default. Finally a decision where I agree with systemd :D. I could try to contact some people with Macs and see if they can test this for us if you like. > I also ponder whether we can claim to offer a suitable substitute for > avahi-autoipd anymore if we disable IPv4LL in dhcpcd's stock > configuration. We'd have to remove that Provides yeah. --Daniel
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
