Re: [HACKERS] TCP/IP with 7.4 beta2 broken?

[Andrew Dunstan]

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Tom Lane writes:

 

Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
   

Can we allow the IPv6 entries to be in pg_hba.conf but ignore them on
non-IPv6 machines, or allow the connection to fail?
     

I don't see a good way yet.  The fly in the ointment is that HAVE_IPV6
is set by configure based on the capabilities of userland libraries;
we cannot assume that HAVE_IPV6 means the kernel knows IPv6.  But if
we simply suppress failure messages on IPv6 addresses, we are going to
create severe headaches for people who are actually using IPv6.
   

What is the problem?  Is it that a non-IPv6 enabled postmaster is unable
to identify or parse valid IPv6 address specifications?  In that case,
we need to provide some substitute routines.
 

Having parsed it what would it do with it? Surely if IP6 isn't 
configured in then having an IP6 address in pg_hba.conf is an error. 
That's why we commented those lines out in the default pg_hba.conf some 
weeks ago.

If Andreas Pflug's patch (with Kurt's caveat) and my patch are applied, 
then I really think there won't be any more difficulties in this area.

cheers

andrew

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]