Re: RFC 2553 bind semantics harms the way to AF independence

[Mauro Tortonesi]

On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Jim Bound wrote:

> and it should not but an implementation that does not permit this is not
> optimal.  we cannot force this behavior on implementors either.  thats why
> it is not in 2553.

can't RFC2553 say something like "a good implementation SHOULD allow
binding of AF_INET and AF_INET6+V6ONLY on the same port"? such a
recommendation would not be a bad thing.

-- 
Aequam memento rebus in arduis servare mentem...

Mauro Tortonesi                 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ferrara Linux User Group        http://www.ferrara.linux.it
Project6 - IPv6 for Linux       http://project6.ferrara.linux.it

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------