Vicenzo Ciancia wrote: "I think it would be better to disable it until a
better solution is found. I have seen bugs wait for months an important
decision leaving users machines broken, when a quick fix was known ..."
I agree 100%. And with Vicenzo's other comments.
Trent Lloyd wrote: "Windows Vista is also shipping with IPv6 enabled by
default, perhaps this will help weed out the devices which don't do what
they are supposed to do and violate the DNS specifications."
This is interesting. Have any Vista users experienced similar problems?
Trent, on your other points, I just can't accept your perspective.
1. IPv6 is far from being imminent. It's been upcoming technology for
five years now and it's been realised that IPv4-based NAT etc have
solved the IPv6 problems adequately. Ubuntu has no control over the
ISPs and routers which don't handle IPv6 properly. What you're
effectively asking _me_ is to be committed to driving IPv6 adoption.
I'm not! I'm committed to a bunch of other things which is why I've
tried Ubuntu, but I did not simultaneously sign up to the IPv6 crusade.
2. in fact, IPv6 was not even something I had thought about (in my
personal life - professionally I have had reason to) before installing
Ubuntu. I bought a cheap router because I'm not into wasting money, and
if I had spent more it would not have been because of IPv6. I didn't
use IPv6 as a procurement criterion when selecting my ISP. Surely most
users would say the same thing.
3. I am fully aware of the theoretical benefits to the world, of
everyone adopting IPv6; But there are currently in practice no user-
perceived benefits from using IPv6, and yet many user-perceived
disbenefits. Search for IPv6 in Linux Format's forums (at
www.linuxformat.co.uk). Every single reference I looked at was negative
("why doesn't this stupid thing work?!"): not one was positive ("I just
love Linux because I can use IPv6 at last!!").
Ubuntu is the first thing that's made IPv6 an issue for me. Everything
I have read about Ubuntu makes me think that Ubuntu should take this
seriously as an inhibitor to adoption. The current default penalizes
people who've done nothing stupid.
If you really want to promote IPv6 in the ecosystem, consider making
_handling_ IPv6 the default for server configurations of Ubuntu, but
_issuing_ IPv4 requests the default for client configurations of Ubuntu.
Actually this idea has drawbacks too (essentially because no machine is
a pure server, and because people might set up such in their homes) but
the point is that it's infrastructure-side where IPv6 adoption has to be
driven, not client-side - and especially not home-client-side.
I respect Kristian Hermansen's conciliatory suggestion, but I am not
keen on it. It's bad to offer users a choice between options they don't
understand. If you offer them such choice, you must of course tell
people to select IPv4 unless they really really know what they're doing.
My preference would be not to bother, just to disable IPv6 by default,
and to offer a FAQ aimed at enabling IPv6 post-install for such users as
may wish to.
--
IPv6 should be disabled by default
https://launchpad.net/bugs/24828
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
