Mihir Luthra <luthramihir...@gmail.com> wrote in <CAEa=dyaekph9qocegteb+fxcmqdqpmbrbzoa548cvjk0l3k...@mail.gmail.com>:
lu> Hi everyone, lu> lu> Just as mentioned in [1], rpc.statd is not ipv6 clean. lu> lu> Although I have been through the code, and didn't found any issues until lu> now. The code conditionally checks for ipv6/ipv4 everywhere and uses ipv6 lu> compatible functions. lu> lu> As per one old commit [2], seems rpc.statd was already made to function lu> correctly with ipv6. lu> lu> I searched bugzilla(thinking someone may have reported something similar, lu> giving rise to the project), but didn't see anything similar for rpc.statd lu> and ipv6 support. lu> lu> I wanted to ask if someone could share the issues they encountered while lu> using rpc.statd with ipv6? I think the project page has wrong information regarding rpc.statd. Although it is not clean from the viewpoint of transport independent, it works with IPv6. There are more userland utilities which do not support IPv6---rwhod, yp*, etc. -- Hiroki
pgpdPhqL5rI56.pgp
Description: PGP signature
