[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: RFC 2553 bind semantics harms the way to AF independence



Erik Nordmark wrote:
> > Actually I suggested it as well, so I wouldn't have a problem with
no
> > default.  Anyone who wants portable apps would just always set the
> > option, no problem.
> 
> The benefit of changing the default would be that applications using
> getaddrinfo could be more address independent.
> With either the current default or an unspecified default those
> applications need code to say
> 	if AF_INET6
> 		turn on IPv6_V6ONLY

Someone else suggested that getaddrinfo (with AF_UNSPEC and AI_PASSIVE)
should return :: if the OS has IPV6_V6ONLY default to off, and both ::
and 0.0.0.0 if the OS has IPV6_V6ONLY default to on, and I agree with
this.

Another problem I have with the current default is that app writers that
want IPv6-only need to know about the IPV6_V6ONLY option, and those that
want both IPv4+IPv6 need to know about the AI_V4MAPPED flag.  So there's
no "simple" api, you have your choice of 2 special cases.

-Dave

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------