Re: Enabling SLAAC for IPv6 by default

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Sep 25, 10:41pm, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
} On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 03:56:09PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
} > So perhaps the kernel code should be modified to support, and prefer by
} > default over the original SLAAC, the RFC7217 mechanism, to address the
} > concern Pierre raises for the case when someone uses the in-kernel
} > SLAAC client?   Or perhaps the situation we have, where it is disabled
} > by default, is ok?
} 
} I'm personable more in favor of removing the in-kernel RA support. I do

     I am vehemently opposed to the idea of removing in-kernal RA
handling.  RA handling is fundamental to the IPv6 protocol.  You
should not have to run a userland daemon in order to be able to
use IPv6.  My IPv6 boxes are perfectly fine without any daemons
for basic networking (other then rtadvd for the router).  I would
not be happy to see this situation change.

     Like certain others, I'm still annoyed by the removal of
rtsol{,d} as it was a simple program for doing a single very simple
task.  However, in the end, it just means that IPv6 takes a bit
longer to come up.

}-- End of excerpt from Joerg Sonnenberger