|
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Tim Mooney wrote:
>> All-
>>
>> I've been through most of the LVS-HOWTO and have searched the
>> LVS wiki and the mailing list archives, and it's still not clear
>> to me what the status of support for IPv6 is. The link on
>> getting involved:
>
> It's come up occassionally, mostly back in the good old days when
> everyone expected to move to IPv6 tomorrow. But tomorrow never
> came and the silence you see indicates that nothing is happening.
> You are one of maybe half a dozen people who've shown interest in
> the matter in the last 7 years. No-one is going to put any
> development work into code for a user pool this small, when there
> are other things more pressing to do. Horms is basically doing all
> the work single handedly in his spare time, so it's not like we
> have a lot of developers to spare. I wouldn't be surprised if
> there was code around from early attempts at LVS-IPv6 but I'm sure
> it's long forgotten now.
>
> If you or your friend are interested in writing and testing the
> IPv6 code, that would be a different matter. I don't know if Horms
> has IPv6 so you would need to keep any eye on the code through the
> various kernel revisions after the IPv6 LVS code was accepted.
I'd like to add to the active interest in IPv6 support.
We're an ISP that would like to start supporting dual stack IPv4/v6
on our ISP servers for the benefit of a early adopter customers.
Of course lack of support isn't holding us up in this scenerio as
we'd just point the AAAA records to a specific server, but it'd
be nice to have the same level of reliability for IPv6 service from
the get go.
We've been using LVS for a couple of years now with good success.
Unfortunately I don't have the expertise to offer much in the way
of development though.
--
Dan White <dwhite@xxxxxxx>
BTC Broadband <http://www.btcbroadband.com>
|
