From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 19:04:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 19:04:12 -0500 Received: from snoopy.apana.org.au ([202.12.87.129]:9477 "HELO snoopy.apana.org.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 19:04:06 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: USAGI IPv6 patches From: Brian May X-Home-Page: http://snoopy.apana.org.au/~bam/ Date: 06 Mar 2001 11:03:51 +1100 Message-ID: <84snkrvk48.fsf@snoopy.apana.org.au> User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Capitol Reef) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, I wondered if there are any long term plans to merge the USAGI IPv6 kernel patches into Linux? See Background: Currently, if my sources on debian-ipv6 are correct, it is not possible to create a IPv6 server that is not broken, as getaddrinfo returns both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, but the bind operation will only succeed on the IPv6 address. The suggested work around at the moment is to ignore the error returned by bind, but I consider that to be broken, because the error might be important. The only solution we have all agreed to (so far) on debian-ipv6 is to use the USAGI patches (which IIRC modify getaddr to return only IPv6 addresses in the above situation), however, other Debian developers are reluctant to require anything that is "non-standard" in the main kernel. Hence my question... -- Brian May