On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 12:22:26AM -0700, Ludovico Cavedon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Vincent Danjean <vdanjean...@free.fr> wrote:
> > ...and squeeze should be released with the default value that minimizes
> > the number of broken behavior
That is, whatever is consistent with the standards, ie, bindb6only=0.
> I agree.
> I remember some arguments like "bindv6only=0 is a linux specific
> option, and e.g. does not work with the freebsd kernel", which in
> principle makes sense, but if too many applications break, it means we
> are not ready for that.
bindv6only=1 is a freebsd-only bug.
It was introduced in an attempt to secure misguided cases where people
blacklist some address ranges instead of whitelisting.
> > Some people around me have been hit by this java bug. They do not read
> > d-d have they would have never found what was broken if they did not
> > talk with me. This bug is really difficult to diagnose for a simple user.
>
> About the java-6-sun package: would it be possible to work around that
> by LD_PRELOADing a wrapper to socket/bind/setsockopt which set
> BINDv6ONLY to 0 for IP sockets?
It is not a bug to rely on the behaviour the RFCs specify, especially that
you need to do some work to work around the BSD limitation.
--
1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
// Never attribute to stupidity what can be
// adequately explained by malice.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100407090447.ga11...@angband.pl
