Hi, I am the network engineer at Australia's Academic and Research Network responsible for assisting the deployment of IPv6 across Australian universities. Your posting was bought to my attention. Your phrasing of the condition for blocking is pretty broad: there are lots of ways to break IPv6, just as there are with IPv4, and just as with IPv4 not all of them are significant enough to be blocking. Can I suggest the following as a starting point: - failure in configuration of interface addresses with a link scope address via stateless address autoconfiguration should block - failure in configuration of interface addresses with a global scope via stateless address autoconfiguration should block - failure in configuration of interface addresses with a global scope via manual configuration should block - failure in configuration of DNS forwarding via stateless DHCP6 should block - failure in configuration of DNS forwarding via RAs should block - failure of connectivity of network ::1/128 (localhost) of all services should block - failure of unicast or multicast connectivity of link local addressing of allowed services should block - failure of unicast connectivity of global addressing of allowed services should block - failure of connectivity of ICMP6 service for codes <= 127 should block Non-stateless DHCP6 is primarily used by ISPs to configure customer routers. Those routers present SLAAC to their downstream users. Non-stateless DHCP6 is also used by enterprises who wish to parallel their existing management of computers via IPv4 DHCP into IPv6. In my view that is a poor network design choice, but there is no denying that it is a choice made by some enterprise networks. At this point in time you could deploy a IPv6 with manual configuration and with SLAAC (with both stateless DHCP6 and RAs to configure DNS) and make most people happy. The significance of the proportion of people made unhappy may or may not be enough for a release blocking bug (as opposed to simple lack of support for that IPv6 feature) -- that's really your choice. It also depends if statefull DHCP6 host configuration was supported in a previous release, in that case a regression leads to such a complicated scenario for network engineers and systems administrators that the bug should be release blocking. Cheers, Glen -- Glen Turner <http://www.gdt.id.au/~gdt/> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
