| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rocco Altier <RoccoA(at)Routescape(dot)com>, Nigel Kukard <nkukard(at)lbsd(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: IPv6 patch |
| Date: | 2003-01-07 17:10:38 |
| Message-ID: | 200301071710.h07HAca23908@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Larry Rosenman wrote:
> > No one has offered any scenario in which it's important to bind to only
> > v4 or only v6 addresses when both are present. In the absence of a
> > compelling argument why that would be useful, I do not see why we're
> > worrying. My own thought is that if I wanted to constrain PG to bind
> > to a subset of a machine's addresses, the extension I'd want is to allow
> > virtual_host to contain a list of names or IP addresses --- of either
> > version. Basing it on v4 versus v6 has no payback that I can see.
>
> Please make sure that you can handle the situation of a IPv6 API, but no
> IPv6
> stack. (E.G. UnixWare up to at least 7.1.3).
Already done. My BSD/OS is that way in the default kernel configuration
too.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-01-07 17:12:20 | Re: IPv6 patch |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-01-07 17:10:02 | Re: IPv6 patch |