On Sat, 8 Dec 2007, Marc Balmer wrote: > Henning Brauer wrote: > > * Marc Balmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-08 15:29]: > >> Henning Brauer wrote: > >>> * Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-08 09:49]: > >>>> Frank Habicht wrote: > >>>>> Hi misc, > >>>>> > >>>>> [i guess misc is better than ports for that..] > >>>>> > >>>>> I ran the patched httpdv6 with the stock httpd.conf > >>>>> -> it was only bound to v6 > >>>>> > >>>>> README.v6 suggests _for_Vhost_operation_ one needs > >>>>> Listen :: 80 > >>>>> Listen 0.0.0.0 80 > >>>>> > >>>>> my test suggests even without vhosts these are needed to run both v4 and > >>>> v6. > >>>> > >>>> Of course you need this. > >>> wait. > >>> if an existing OpenBSD installation with existing httpd.conf gets > >>> upgraded > >>> (without changing the httpd.conf) and after that the httpd suddenly only > >>> listens on v6 and not v4 any more, then the patch is wrong. > >> here, a change to the software requires a change in the configuration > >> as well. > >> > >> In this case it is well documented and the change is trivial. > >> > >> and we have enough ways to teach users about it. > > > > bullshit. > > the diff is plain wrong and willfuck users. > > and the fix is so obvious and reasonably easy... > > (no af specified = both, OF COURSE) > > This diff assumes IPv6 as default if no AF is specified, this is what > is expected from IPv6 software and what the original authors intended,
This is the problem. You are trying to switch a daemon to be IPv6 centric when the majority of our users doesn't use IPv6. I can understand that KAME has that agenda but I dont think OpenBSD should. It is like we should have disabled SSHv1 the same moment we implemented SSHv2 in OpenSSH. > The change is so trivial that this will not fuck any users. Get real... I have no problems with it listening on both. But one might change the example config file to not use the * syntax. -moj
