Re: [vserver] Need advice on which path to take for IPv6 support

Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>
>
> Herbert Poetzl wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 04:40:16PM -0500, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>>
>> [compatibility stuff zapped]
>>
>>>> strictly speaking ...
>>>> vs2.3.x .. development release
>>>> vs2.3.x.y ... experimental release
>>
>>> OK.
>>
>>> Can you say anything about the stability of
>>> patch-2.6.22.19-vs2.3.0.34.diff from a practical perspective?
>>
>> yes, it was our experimental branch back then when
>> 2.6.22.x was the 'current' kernel
>>
>>> Its been unchanged for some time now.
>>
>> because experimental moved on with the kernel, i.e.
>> all development after 2.6.22.x happened on later
>> kernels, and there is no backporting in the experimental
>> branch, so vs2.3.0.34 stopped exaclty there
>>
>>> Would you consider it suitable for "production" use?
>>
>> definitely not, it was superceded by all later
>> experimental releases and we fixed quite a number
>> of issues since then, most of them have been backported
>> to the stable branch (at least as long as 2.6.22 was
>> maintained upstream)
>
> Well, I'm glad I asked.
>
> Is there *anything* based on 2.6.22 that supports IPv6 that you would
> consider suitable for production use?

While what Herbert is saying is true, there are large deployments based
on 2.6.22-vs2.3 operating in the wild. E.g. PlanetLab is currently
running this combination.

> Thanks,
> Paul
>
>> [patching stuff zapped]
>>
>>> Most likely our kernel people would do the porting, if we did it.
>>> But they are certainly not expert in either vserver or IPv6.
>>
>> you can always ask us regarding Linux-VServer patches :)
>>
>>> A lot of the porting can be done by anybody as long as the code being
>>> patched hasn't changed too much. But when things don't work right,
>>> they might not be in a position to diagnose the problem. And then it
>>> would be hard to come back and ask you nice people.
>>
>> depends on the questions, really ... besides that, there
>> is always the option of hiring a Linux-VServer developer
>> to fix up/backport stuff ...
>>
>>> Of course that may also be true merging patches. But I expect we won't
>>> be patching the same things.
>>
>> [bug free release stuff zapped]
>>
>> best,
>> Herbert
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Paul
>>
>

-- 
Daniel Hokka Zakrisson