In your previous mail you wrote:
duplication of code is (and - if we're not gonna change the API draft in a
significant way - will always be) inevitable. there are MANY problems in
handling both ipv6 and ipv4 (or better, ipv4-mapped) traffic with a single
AF_INET6 socket, and most of them are related to security.
=> I disagree. There is *no* security issue with IPv4-mapped addresses
as soon as one doesn't forget them.
moreover, all the ipv6 compliant code that i have seen until now is full
of preprocessor switches like:
=> no, there are some codes which are written without switches.
Of course they work only on systems where IPv6 is fully integrated.
programming ipv6-compliant software in the RFC2553-compliant way is
quite a nightmare. if you have some experience in porting apps to ipv6
under linux (which is, as you state, a RFC2553-compliant OS), you sure
know what i am talking about.
=> I have ported many applications to IPv6 on BSD systems without
the problems you seemed to have encountered...
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
