On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 09:06 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>
> > > diff --git a/src/ipconfig.c b/src/ipconfig.c
> > > index 6ffcd88..e6e63b2 100644
> > > --- a/src/ipconfig.c
> > > +++ b/src/ipconfig.c
> > > @@ -849,6 +849,7 @@ static struct connman_ipconfig *create_ipv6config(int
> > > index)
> > >
> > > ipv6config->index = index;
> > > ipv6config->type = CONNMAN_IPCONFIG_TYPE_IPV6;
> > > + ipv6config->method = CONNMAN_IPCONFIG_METHOD_OFF;
> > >
> > > ipv6config->address = connman_ipaddress_alloc(AF_INET6);
> > > if (ipv6config->address == NULL) {
> >
> > Because you don't yet support RA, this isn't going to break my normal
> > IPv6 connectivity, right?
>
> it should not break anything. However the more testing we get on this
> the better.
I kind of expected this to break with commit 933237c1 but it didn't. Is
that expected?
My home network appears in default.profile with
IPv6.method=off
IPv6.netmask_prefixlen=0
IPv4.method=dhcp
IPv4.netmask_prefixlen=0
I remain concerned that at some point, this *is* going to break. Really,
shouldn't we be defaulting to autoconf as the IPv6 method?
--
dwmw2
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
connman@connman.net
http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
