[Bug 6654] Make sa-update and its infrastructure usable over IPv6

[bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org]

https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6654

D. Stussy <so...@kd6lvw.ampr.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |software+spamassassin@kd6lv
                   |                            |w.ampr.org

--- Comment #1 from D. Stussy <so...@kd6lvw.ampr.org> 2011-08-25 20:14:59 UTC ---
I agree - IPv6:  All hosts in the infrastructure should be dual IPv4/IPv6
stacked.  If one doesn't have a specific IPv6 native allocation, then use a
6to4 (2002::/16) address for now.  That's why it exists - it gives every IPv4
holder an IPv6 subnet (of /48 size) per IPv4 address.

There is no reason why any DNS server should be reachable over IPv4 only.
(Same with DNSSEC support.)

I've been using IPv6 for more than 8 years (although the first three was via
6to4 only).  What I don't get is why more people aren't using it.  How is using
IPv6 today "early adoption?"

For embedded equipment, as recently as 2007, I asked a manufacturer if their
device supported IPv6.  The rep. said, "No."  I called it broken out of the
box.  He didn't get it.  Why is there such a reluctance to support IPv6?

Apache's httpd server 2.0 (and later) supports IPv6.  I'm surprised that you're
telling me that they don't have such enabled on their own servers.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.