> This is NOT about addresses on bridge ports (and I agree those are not
> needed or desirable), but the case where the bridge port is a VLAN

Ok.

> interface. Then the current code prevents you from using not just the
> VLAN interface (e.g. eth0.3), but also the underlying physical interface
> (i.e. eth0). I see no reason why you should not use both of these
> simultaneously.

Well, having IPv6 addresses attached to those ports can also be undesirable,
I really think that those addresses should be allowed with an explicit
config not by default.

> The patch I sent does not change anything about disabling ipv6 on the
> bridge port interface, only for the underlying physical interface for a
> VLAN bridge port.

I know, but I don't think that is the behaviour change we need.

I think we should find a way to say we should not disable them, or a way to
enable them if we want, but not by default.

Regards.
-- 
Manty/BestiaTester -> http://manty.net

Reply via email to