On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 12:33 +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:

Well, you have been told that your proposed new feature breaks IPv4
support with specific settings.  I do not think that you are speeding
up
anything here by ignoring that fact.  On the contrary. 

It is obviously a corner case which is not deserved such a high priority
(as high as a kernel panic or a compile error). bindv6only is default to
be 0, I even wasn't aware of such sysctl until David pointed it out.

So, please give me a reason why we should let such a corner case block
the inclusion? I think there are still other such corner cases too (and
maybe many), which neither you nor me are aware of.