On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 9:28 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> 2. ip6tables: I do not know of any provider actually working with ipv6. >>> So I assume the mass of all users do not need it. >> >> Agreed -- but should be auto done based on packages chosen on install > > What?! > No. Or rather, only if the IPv4 iptables can be disabled too, or is > there a no network access install that I'm not aware of? :) > > As soon as you happen to plug into an IPv6 enabled network you would > be exposed without any firewalling, thats only okay for v6 if it's > also okay for v4. > > About 4% of the web browsers hitting English language Wikipedia are > IPv6 enabled. IPv6 enabled web clients may even become more numerous > than Linux desktops this year, almost certainly by next year, so be > careful what you call rare. :) Seems like I needed some serious reeducation on this topic. Based on the comments, there seems to be more than enough reason to keep ip6tables. Change my 'Agree' to a "Disagree' -- Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
