Re: Temporary IPv6 addresses vs. netgroups

[Gert Doering <gert%greenie.muc.de@localhost>]

Hi,

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.

"Yes but..."

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").

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             
gert%greenie.muc.de@localhost
fax: +49-89-35655025                        
gert%net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de@localhost