Jim Bound wrote:
>
> Brian,
>
> Let me clarify. I think its crazy too. But what I was beaten in to
> believe and I think XNET was too is that implementors want this?
>
> /jim
Jim
Really? Every implementation I know of (the ones I've seen the code to)
do exacatly what Brian described, that is just translate the address to
binary and return it.
I agree with Brian that getaddrinfo() should not do reverse lookups.
That is what getnameinfo() is for. Adding this would makes this
function even more bloated then it already is and add more state
information to keep track of.
I vote "no" to this.
-vlad
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vladislav Yasevich Tel: (603) 884-1079
Compaq Computer Corp. Fax: (435) 514-6884
110 Spit Brook Rd ZK03-3/T07
Nashua, NH 03062
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
