Re: strange problem with ip6

On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 07:29:47PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote:
> supporting scoped addresses could have their uses but then again
> theres nothing stopping you to bind multiple global ipv6 addresses
> to your loopback interface which would work fine for disconnected
> setups and it might be a bit cleaner.

True, but there's no unscoped private-use address space in IPv6 the
way there is in v4 (i.e. no 1918-style addresses for v6). Which
means that unless you want to use addresses that ought to be
scoped (like link-local) without a scope, you have to use real
addresses instead. Hmm. Well, I guess you could use 2001:DB8::/32,
which is reserved for documentation. I'm just worried that, because
we don't support scoped addresses, people are going to configure
things with _real_ addresses they haven't been allocated, and then
accidentally connect such a configuration to the Internet. All my
experience tells me that such things eventually always leak, and I'd
hate for Postgres to be the source of that sort of damage.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
The whole tendency of modern prose is away from concreteness.
--George Orwell