RPC and IPv6

[Ulrich Drepper]

On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 00:42, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

> No, I never said this. I wrote that we would break the protocol if we
> would add IPv6 support to the current sunrpc code as we tried in the 
> past. ti-rpc speaks the old and the new protocol.

Then what you say makes even less sense.  There is no reason to give up
our well-proven implementation for the old protocol.  It can be get
despite what you said.  You just have to add the new code.  Yes, this
won't be as easy as replacing with a completely new implementation but
it is *much* safer.  We can be sure there are no compatibility problems
and the bugs we fixed in the past are not popping up again.

So, when you said the current implementation cannot be fixed you were
wrong.  Apparently it is possible since otherwise ti-rpc wouldn't be
able to do it.

So, you can rip out the new protocol implementation of ti-rpc and we add
it and then add the appropriate multiplexers to distinguish between the
protocols.

> That's the reason for using ti-rpc instead of hacking sunrpc: With
> ti-rpc we don't have the protocol incompatibilities we would introduce
> with a hacked sunrpc version.

This is complete nonsense.  If ti-rpc can be compatible there is no
reason why an extension of the existing implementation cannot be, too.

-- 
---------------.                          ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Red Hat          `--' drepper at redhat.com   `------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20020531/76273731/attachment.sig>