Un-obsolete'ing ipv6_enable

[David Horn]

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Hiroki Sato <hrs at freebsd.org> wrote:
> David Horn <dhorn2000 at gmail.com> wrote
>  in <25ff90d61003082037v3519995bx7e119e9d14143db4 at mail.gmail.com>:
>
> dh> The question is what is the desired end-state for the rc.conf
> dh> configuration of ipv6 ?
> dh>
> dh> Do we want to have a per-interface setting required to enable ipv6 SLAAC ?
> dh> Do we want to have a global setting for ipv6 SLAAC ?
> dh> Or do we want to choose sane defaults and allow the user to over-ride
> dh> on both a global default, and a per-interface basis ?
> dh>
> dh> So, in the 8.0-RELEASE code (and previous TTBOMK), both IPv4 DHCP and
> dh> IPv6 SLAAC required manual enabling, although it was inconsistent in
> dh> that one was global (IPV6 accept_rtadv), and one was per-interface
> dh> (IPv4 DHCP).  Some of this has already started to change in -current.
> dh>
> dh> Question 1)  Based upon history, sane defaults would be do nothing (NO
> dh> DHCPv4, NO IPv6 accept_rtadv).  Do you agree with this as the
> dh> continued defaults ?
>
>  I am for "no automatic configuration unless one specifies it", but it
>  should be able to be configured in a per-interface basis as well as
>  global basis.

Sorry for the delayed response.  I agree with this paradigm.

>
> dh> Question 2) Assuming that people do desire consistency with allowing
> dh> for both a global, and a per-interface setting, do you agree with
> dh> having a global default for DHCPv4 (dhcpv4_default_enable), and for
> dh> IPv6 slaac/accept_rtadv  (ipv6-slaac_default_enable), and the
> dh> per-interface DHCPv4 (ifconfig_IF0="dhcp") aka a meta configuration
> dh> variable, and a per-interface IPv6 slaac (ifconfig_IF0="slaac") aka a
> dh> meta configuration variable.
>
>  I think the global configuration can be realized by setting something
>  like ifconfig_DEFAULT_<proto>="AUTO" instead of adding a new global
>  knobs.

Yes, that is certainly one method that can work.

I will put together two review versions of a diff.  One with backward
compatible logic included (at least for the ipv6_enable YES/NO cases,
and the ipv6_ifconfig_IF syntax ), and one with the backwards compat
code removed to further this discussion.

>
> dh> Do people understand what I am proposing here, or do you want me to
> dh> put together a diff with an implementation to properly review ?   I
> dh> already have some of it working in a separate experiment for adding
> dh> DHCPv6 configurations.
>
>  Yeah, actually I received your proposal a month ago and I should have
>  put it to the wiki or so.  Sorry about that.  I will work on that
>  soon for the further discussion.
>
> -- Hiroki
>