[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Temporary IPv6 addresses vs. netgroups
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:50:46AM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> The more proposals I read, the more I think that the original problem
> can easiest be solved by allowing interested applications to bind,
> where this isn't yet possible.
Speaking as a sysadmin, being able to bind an application to a specific
local IPv6 address is useful, but most of the time I don't want to bother
to look up the specific address, and just bind to a class of address.
(Think "renumbering your subnet" - that should make NFS continue to use
the autoconfigured-but-non-privacy IPv6 address, without me having to
to rc.conf and change bind addresses for umteen different programs - sure,
that could be done with a global variable, but still, "one extra place
to touch when the network changes").
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
Main Index |
Thread Index |