public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug libc/11469] New: No IPv6 option in glibc
@ 2010-04-05 18:28 martinbarrowcliff at gmail dot com
2010-04-05 18:30 ` [Bug libc/11469] " drepper at redhat dot com
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: martinbarrowcliff at gmail dot com @ 2010-04-05 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
This is about the resolver lib.
This is definitely a design error but lets call it a bug for now.
The resolver libs infuse IPv6 code as part of every build. Why so?
Since when did Microsoft influence open source code this way?
I looked at every glibc from the beginning, and this is bad, ugly code.
Those hacks are long overdue for re-write and should not be
considered for inclusion. A clean re-write from the start is needed.
IPv6 should still be an option, but not forced, as the libs try to do.
I am old and tired, but if someone else cannot fix that mess, I will.
I am growing weary of disabling all those hacks every time I build a OS.
--
Summary: No IPv6 option in glibc
Product: glibc
Version: unspecified
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libc
AssignedTo: drepper at redhat dot com
ReportedBy: martinbarrowcliff at gmail dot com
CC: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: any
GCC host triplet: any
GCC target triplet: any
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11469
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <bug-11469-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>]
* [Bug libc/11469] No IPv6 option in glibc
[not found] <bug-11469-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2014-06-30 18:19 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: fweimer at redhat dot com @ 2014-06-30 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11469
Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |security-
--- Comment #2 from martin barrowcliff <martinbarrowcliff at gmail dot com> ---
Subject: Re: No IPv6 option in glibc
drepper at redhat dot com wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com 2010-04-05 18:30 -------
> IPv6 is needed. It's trivial to disable any use of it so there is no need at
> all to do anything in glibc.
>
>
I appreciate your fast reply, and certainly respect your opinion, but
the issue extends
far beyond glibs. It is viral code.
Indeed, a few people do need ipV6 for corporate networks, however
Internet use is
very low, and there is doubt if that protocol will ever be accepted
mainstream.
It is NOT trivial to disable ipv6, and you of all people should know that.
It is stuck in every linux dist because they all use that same resolver
library.
Many applications are built with IPv6 enabled if the code is available
in the libs.
Some have options to disable, some don't. But it is NEVER a requirement.
Being able to choose to enable it should be an option, and not forced on
the builder.
I certainly didn't mean to insult your code or intelligence. We are
still friends, please.
I never had a ipv6 network. Never will.
I have run authoritative DNS servers and resolvers on ipv4 and set them
to ignore
AAAA requests because I got a lot of that junk and it is just noise if
you don't need it.
I have methodically disabled all the IPv6 resolver lib functions in my
hand built OS and I can
assure you; ipv6 is NOT needed by me, or by any packages I have ever
built.
I also have considerably faster local networking because of my hacks.
So saying ipv6 is needed does not address this issue properly.
Having read every line of that code, I know the resolver libs are way
old and need to
be rewritten with an option for IPv6.
I am 60 yrs old but don't for a minute think I can't fix this issue to
the gratitude
of millions. But you could do it easier. The ipv6 issue IS a problem
for ipv4 networks.
Best regards,
Marty B.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-06-30 18:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-04-05 18:28 [Bug libc/11469] New: No IPv6 option in glibc martinbarrowcliff at gmail dot com
2010-04-05 18:30 ` [Bug libc/11469] " drepper at redhat dot com
[not found] <bug-11469-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
2014-06-30 18:19 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).