* Guus Sliepen (g...@debian.org) [100621 22:57]: > There has been an extensive discussion about the proper default value of the > net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl, both on the debian-devel mailing list and in > bugreport 560238. Since people are clearly divided on the issue, and it is > unlikely a compromise can be found, I have forwarded it to you for a decision. > Please read the past discussion, but to summarise the arguments for both > possible default values:
Thanks for bringing that to our attention. After reading the bug log, I don't think there is much which isn't said yet, so I'll try to avoid repeating. I need to admit that I consider the reasons to stay with the previous default, i.e. an value of 0 to be more convincing. It might had been an error a few years ago to set 0 as the default, but well - now we are here. I don't see why we should break otherwise working software. I would however welcome to have some bugfixing campaign (release goals for anyone?) which gets rid of the old interfaces in our code base. We should also think if we want to get the default changed on kbsd - basically kbsd is the new kid, so I don't think it warrants that we do strange stuff on Debian. Also, perhaps just an appropriate warning for ksbd in the release notes might be enough (at least for squeeze). Having said this, I would like to call for an vote with the options A set net.ipv6.bindv6only to 0 B set net.ipv6.bindv6only to 1 C further discussion unless someone from the tech ctte sees the need for further discussions (or options) right now. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
