On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 15:09:23 -0500 (EST) "Matt W. Benjamin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am probably misunderstanding something, but is it the case that the > address types of the future problem is the same one addressed by RFC > 5665? If so, would it be applicable? This sounds like exactly what we want (to the naive me). It even answers the questions I was about to ask about whether we wanted to involve the transport layer and the port number. If I'm reading this correctly, everything is in ASCII strings on the wire, though, which sounds pretty awful. But my first impression is that that is a small price to pay to not have to come up with our own whole separate system. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
