On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 10:07, ext Greg Troxel wrote:
> The bug was in a fix Jan is putting in to avoid an unpacking problem -
> nothing to do with v6.
> 
> I don't see any v6 code in the head of the rpc2 module.  I would
> really like to get coda working over v6, as I have friends stuck with
> NAT that currently can't play in the coda/IPsec world.

I just did the RPC2 module; there's still a lot of work to make Coda
itself run over v6 (see the README in the v6 patch I posted to the Coda
mailing list just before Christmas).  Utilities and databases have to
support the v6 addresses, as well as more networking code.
> 
> It's amusing in a sad sort of way that you are hacking on v6 and yet
> are stuck with a firewall that won't let you do cvs.  But I know that
> is often how it goes these days.  Perhaps Jan can get the cvs server
> to be available over v6 :-)

This only works until people start deploying v6 firewalls that block CVS
:-(.  CheckPoint already supports it.

At least we get away from the evilness that is NAT.

There's no reason why the Coda web server can't be available over v6
today, though. 
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=coda.cs.cmu.edu tells me it's
running Apache 1.3.27 on a Debian Linux box.  Both support v6 (1.3 may
take a patch; in Apache 2.0 it's native), and if CMU doesn't have native
v6 yet, you can always tunnel to FreeNet or somewhere.  I think CVS even
runs over v6.  The hard part is getting a matching AAAA record in the
DNS; DNS managers are often curmudgeons with fragile setups they're
reluctant to change :-).

		--Rod