Proposed F19 Feature: DualstackNetworking - proper dual stack IPv4 and IPv6 networking

[Pavel Simerda]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "William Brown" <william at firstyear.id.au>
>
> On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 00:01 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 9:48 PM, William Brown
> > <william at firstyear.id.au> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2013-01-02 at 21:06 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Jaroslav Reznik
> > >> <jreznik at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >> > = Features/DualstackNetworking =
> > >> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DualstackNetworking
> > >
> > > I think that this is a really good goal. I can identify the
> > > following
> > > that probably need work as part of this to improve the user
> > > experience.
> > >
> > > 1) For a user, there is no option in NetworkManager to enable
> > > dhcp6c
> > > from the gui. By Default, this option is "not listed" in
> > > ifcfg-ethX,
> > > even as a DHCP6C=no, making it hard to find and enable.
> > >
> > > 2) Privacy extensions still has no UI to enable / disable from
> > > NetworkManager.
> > >
> > > 3) dhclient prefix delegation often has issues on pppoe sessions,
> > > meaning that you will often get the pppoe session dropping out,
> > > ipv4
> > > will recover correctly, but ipv6 will not re-request a prefix
> > > until some
> > > timeout, usually an hour, in which time all ipv6 services are
> > > unavailable. This causes DNS timeouts, webpages to respond
> > > slowly, email
> > > accounts to not fetch etc.
> > 
> > There's also other issues with NM and ppp/pppoe with IPv6. In the
> > service provider space this side of IPv6 is still a moving target
> > with
> > some standards evolving to enable ISPs to push IPv6 subnets out to
> > consumer routers and the like. There's still bugs like [1] to
> > resolve
> > in NM, I know it's closed but that was to open individual bugs and
> > I
> > think there's some bits left to do to properly deal with RFC 5072
> > for
> > v6 over ppp.
> > 
> > Peter
> > 
> > [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=593813
> 
> I don't necessarily mean that NM should support PD for ppp
> interfaces,
> more that "some parts" of the whole IPv6 experience still need work
> for
> them to operate correctly.
> 
> However, saying that, it would be lovely if in my ifcfg-ppp I could
> just
> add a "DHCP6C-PD" option or the like, and have it work ....
> 
> 
> 
> However, as others have said, the "scope" of this work should be
> defined.