On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:43:05 -0500 Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Actually, this made me realize, if you do encode multiple addresses > > in one address structure, you can make this more efficient for > > larger numbers of a addresses. That is, instead of having one IP > > address per structure, if you just have multiple addresses in the > > e.g. IPv4 opaque, you don't need to repeat the "IPv4 address type" > > int every time. That would almost always save some space, since we'd > > almost always be dealing with lists of addresses of the same type > > (or two types). > > No, in fact, I expect we'll be dealing with lists of addresses of > mixed type, like "all of the addresses of this fileserver that's > registered in the VLDB". And wouldn't most cases involve more addresses than address types? e.g. 4 IPv4 addresses, and 4 IPv6 addresses? -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
