Re: getaddrinfo(), getnameinfo() and friends question

[Stig Venaas <venaas at nvg dot ntnu dot no>]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 04:12:32PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <misiek@pld.org.pl> writes:
> 
> > I think that these ai_flags options are very usefull and that's
> > why I asked about glibc draft-rfc2553 compatibility.
> 
> If you want to help, participate in the IPv6 working groups (which
> nobody here does) and make them get their acts together.

I do. I haven't really participated, but at least attended (am at the
IETF right now). To me it looks like there's consensus in the working
group on the rfc2553bis draft. These options are useful.

To me the problem seems to be that there are several groups setting
standards, and I'm not aware of much communication between them (there
might be a lot of communication going on without me knowing it of
course). There are several differences between the standards at
the moment.

It's a shame that the standards are in flux now that 2.2 is being
finished. There's a danger that 2.2 won't be compliant to any of
the standards. Not much to do about it, except perhaps try to
anticipate (maybe not so easy) what the standard will be.

I haven't followed the work of the other standard groups, so I'm not
really in position to say much, maybe I've said too much already (:

If someone implements AI_V4MAPPED and the other flags, will you put
it in?

Stig

-- 
Duct tape is like the force.  It has a light side, and a dark side, and
it holds the universe together ...
                -- Carl Zwanzig