time to finally adopt IPv6 ?

[Bjoern A. Zeeb]

On 24 Jul 2019, at 13:55, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> We have ping(8), and ping6(8), we need to tell route(8) if we want -4 
> or -6
> and so on and so forth.
>
> We dont need to rehash why IPv6 is treated as a stepchild, and even
> less if it is anybodys fault, at this point it is an artifact of
> history and just that.
>
> But isnt it about time we start in earnest to integrate things from
> a command line point of view?
>
> Even if for source code hygiene points if it amounts to no more
> than ping(8) re-execing ping6(8) when given an IPv6 argument ?

What is ping(8)?  I don’t have it.

There is a GSoC project I think going on to do the ping thing though I 
cannot remember seeing emails about it;  my take on this remains:  
please don’t try to mangle ping6 into ping; the arguments are too 
convoluted.  We lost that almost 20 years ago.

netstat, sockstat, route, nc, telnet, .., or even ifconfig could be more 
clever, indeed.

Make IPv6 the default for commands (we have sysctls which could even 
tell you if the users wants 4 or 6 as default).

Rip IPv4 out slowly and let it die is what I am working on … slowly 
…

I think if we want to do the “inet”/“inet6”  “-4”/“-6”  
“foo”/“foo6” cleanup, doing the inventory of all of them first 
and then have a common plan to straighten them all out would be good 
(keeping in mind that for a lot of people IPv4 will go away during the 
next decade).


/bz