On 22 Dec 2011, at 17:37, Jason Edgecombe <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi everyone, > > What is the status of the AFS protocol support for IPv6? What remains to be > done? To the best of my knowledge, there has been no standardisation work around IPv6 support. However, what actually needs to be done from a standardisation point of view is relatively modest. There are no protocol changes required for RX, and Ubik (plus the binary format of the vlserver database) is out of scope for this group. That leaves us with the changes necessary to the RXAFS and VL sets of RPCs. As Andrew notes, we have consensus that the correct thing to do here is to define a new address type, based around the extensible union. RPCs which take or return addresses then need to be modified to use this new type. The RPC modifications are actually relatively modest, and don't have a huge about of overlap with the RPC refresh project. If we had a volunteer for this work, I would have no problem with IPv6 RPC variants being standardised separately - in fact, it would seem like a great way of making forwards progress on this. Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
