Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

X Might Be Ready For IPV6

Posted by timothy on from the bajillions-and-bajillions dept.

makapuf writes "According to linuxtoday, the X Consortium has published enhancement proposals to let X and IPV6 interoperate. This is surely a relief for the masses here that longed for X support for IPV6. Or the contrary? The proposal can be found here."

2 of 217 comments (clear)

  1. Perhaps by fireboy1919 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can think of what that will be like.

    "Hey...X doesn't work with IPv6. I'll just tunnel it through an IPv6 ssh tunnel. Problem solved."

    I guess I won't have to worry much about that day.

    Besides, if you're using X over the net WITHOUT ssh (the only place where IPv6 is necessarily needed, since everywhere else you can use private addresses), what are you thinking?!!!

    It's WAY to slow without compressing, which means sending it through some kind of tunnel. Personally, I think it's way too slow anyway. RealVNC beats it for bandwidth usage and it's just a framebuffer, even compared to dxpc and lbxproxy (at least that has been my observation).

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    1. Re:Perhaps by Phil+Karn · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I agree, X is one of the less compelling applications for native IPv6 support given that just about everyone I know already tunnels it over an SSH connection. SSH has had IPv6 support for some time, so you can easily SSH into a machine with IPv6 and invoke an X session with the IPv4 connections on each end that never leave the local machines.

      SSH tunneling works so well for X that I wouldn't even mind if all IP support were removed, as long as there was still a way (e.g., UNIX domain sockets) to connect the SSH daemons to the X server and client on each end.

      That said, it's still a good thing for X to support IPv6, just in case someone wants to use it. Every Internet application should support both IPv4 and IPv6.