https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=752842
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=752842#c10
roeland jansen changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID |
--- Comment #10 from roeland jansen 2012-04-02 17:12:33 UTC ---
it would have made sense for portable devices and only when dhcp is used.
as with bnc678066 I fully agree with the part Freek said:
"in my view Privacy Extension should only be the default for traveling systems.
When Privacy Extensions are not enabled, systems that are static in a network
always get the same address (i.e. the host part), derived from the MAC address.
This makes it possible, in a small network, to use these addresses to
communicate with each other, without the need for a DHCP6 and/or DNS server.
With Privacy Extension always enabled, the IPv6 address changes each least each
24 hours, which makes it difficult to communicate without additional services
that keep track of these changing addresses."
What if we did it this way "best of both worlds":
1) if dhcp is used, we assume a portable system and have privacy extensions
enabled by default via a box click box next to the IPv4 DHCP selection.
2) if static addresses are used we assume that this is deliberate so disable
the privacy extensions by default via a click box next to the IPv4 IP address
It's a complete pain in the ass if we want to have IPv6 deployed on a large
scale. besides, it doesn't make much sense.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.