Great to hear from you.
Going IPv6 native does not get rid of IPv4. The IPv6 API is by definition
dual stack (strange though it may sound). What we can do is make all the
code IPv6 or protocol independent and still support IPv4. This is what I
meant. For example, all IPv4 addresses can be written as IPv6 addresses
and the API will create IPv6 or IPv4 sockets as appropriate.
I have run an IPv6 scanner against the Samba4 code and am compiling a list
of changes that I think need to be made.
Will you be at the Google CIFS event? If so it would be great to discuss
this with you further.
> Getting rid of IPv4 isn't possible - several of the protocols we support
> work *only* over IPv4. We also need to serialize the IP address in several
> cases, so there has to be IPv4-specific code there.
> On the other hand, I don't think IPv6 should be a second-class citizen
> like it is now. For example, we should have tests for IPv6 when it is