On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 19:41:45 -0500 Jason Edgecombe <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is there a plausible case where multiple IPv4, IPv6 or a mixture of > addresses would need to be packed into this single field? I'm just > wondering if we need to deal with multicast/anycast/foocast or dual > IPv4/IPv6 layers. > > I'm guessing that these cases would be a list or array of the field > under discussion, but I wanted to ask the naive question. I think it's handled fine by the layer above, by having an array of addresses. Conceptually, to me, the address just specifies "what do I give to sendto()". While you may sendto() in a loop retrying different addresses, etc, each packet transmission only gets a single destination address. Of course, if somehow in the future this assumption is violated, I think everything we're discussing here allows for it. You simply make a new address type that consists of a bunch of IPv4/6 addresses. It's hard for me to imagine that being necessary, but we're not precluding it. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
