From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [RFC] IPV6 address management Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:01:22 -0800 Message-ID: <20090108140122.5488d84c@extreme> References: <20090108134402.6e88438f@extreme> <20090108.135125.13529853.davem@davemloft.net> <20090108135614.23aed603@extreme> <20090108.135819.103389689.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail.vyatta.com ([76.74.103.46]:37511 "EHLO mail.vyatta.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751753AbZAHWBX (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:01:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090108.135819.103389689.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:58:19 -0800 (PST) David Miller wrote: > From: Stephen Hemminger > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:56:14 -0800 > > > On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:51:25 -0800 (PST) > > David Miller wrote: > > > > > From: Stephen Hemminger > > > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:44:02 -0800 > > > > > > > On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:58:30 -0800 (PST) > > > > David Miller wrote: > > > > > > > > > Or is it to gradually get people to use the non-default > > > > > (via distribution sysctl settings etc.) and eventually > > > > > make it the default? > > > > No plan to ever change the default. Just ship with sysctl.conf > > > > setting. > > > > > > If the distributions all ship with the sysctl changed > > > to the non-default, our "default" is pretty meaningless > > > wouldn't you say? > > > > It seems the only logical way to undo a poor choice > > in the original design > > If the dists can do it so unilaterally, why can't we? > > Everything about these proposals is a contradiction. > That's why I don't like them at all. > > I say we keep the behavior, we don't change or break > anything, and people need to learn how to cope with it. Fine, it won't be the first or last vendor specific kernel patch.