tech-net archive

[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 01:37 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> To be even more emphatic about that, one thing that we should be
> doing is shipping NetBSD (and its packages) to select rational address
> types by default - by all means allow sysadmins (or users) to alter
> the defaults, but the defaults should be rational.
> That means that postfix (and sendmail) and nfs, should all be using
> stable addresses, whereas firefox, wget (etc) should all be default
> configured
> to use temporarary addresses (in each case of course, assuming the
> appropriate address type is available).

How do you determine a stable address vs temporary?

For example, I use DHCP to assign IP addresses on almost everything
now, including devices that are NFS/CIFS/SMB clients. The only place
where I have a static address is a server.

Let me throw another twist to this...

Lets say that my laptop is plugged into a local LAN and it has a
connection to the Internet via a firewall and ADSL router. The LAN
connection is established with DHCP. If my ADSL goes down I then
turn on WiFi on my phone and laptop and connect to the Internet
via WiFi to my laptop.

If temporary is DHCP then both of my links are temporary.

How then should my browser then connect to the Internet?
What about ssh, etc?

I'll add that the above scenario is not hypothetical and is currently
solved by unplugging the LAN cable with the unfortunate side effect
of disrupting any local services that I was using.

The argument that I'm making here is that I don't see
temporary vs stable as being a useful abstraction in the
classification of addresses for applications to use as there
is no reasonable way to classify an address as such.

> There's no way TNF can ship systems with specific addresses built into
> them, nor can it know specific interface names, or anything else.



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index