Re: ipv6 vs. LAMP

[Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo <carlosm3011 () gmail com>]

IMHO you should never, ever make your MySQL accesible over the public
Internet, which renders the issue of MySQL not supporting IPv6 correctly
mostly irrelevant. You could even run your MySQL behind your web backend
using RFC1918 space (something I do recommend).

Moreover, if you need direct access to the engine, you can trivially create
an SSH tunnel (You can even do this in a point-and-click way using the
latest MySQL Workbench). SSH works over IPv6 just fine.

And for the LAMP stack, as long as the "A" fully supports IPv6 (which it
does), we are fine.

Warm regards,

Carlos

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com> wrote:

> On 10/21/10 2:59 PM, Brandon Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Dan White <dwhite () olp net> wrote:
> >
> > > On 21/10/10 14:43 -0700, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > >
> > > > In a message written on Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 01:53:49PM -0700,
> Christopher
> > > > McCrory wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > open to the world.  After a few google searches, it seems that
> > > > > PostgreSQL is in a similar situation.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know when PostgreSQL first supported IPv6, but it works just
> > > > fine.  I just fired up a stock FreeBSD 8.1 system and built the
> Postgres
> > > > 8.4 port with no changes, and viola:
> > >
> > > All this is pretty moot point if you run a localized copy of your
> database
> > > (mysql or postgres) and connect via unix domains sockets.
> > True. It mostly affects shared/smaller hosting providers who have
> customers
> > that want direct access to the database remotely over the public network
> > (and don't want to use some local admin tool such as phpMyAdmin).
>
> linux/unix machines can trivially build ip-tunnels of several flavors.
>
> > -brandon


-- 
--
=========================
Carlos M. Martinez-Cagnazzo
http://cagnazzo.name
=========================