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

[David Terrell]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:50:33PM -0400, Jim Bound wrote:
> I was directly speaking of implementations that make billions of dollars.
> That is not Linux or BSD.

With all due respect, when you're talking about implementor eyeballs,
a huge percentage of unix server implementors learn based on whatever
linux supports, because that's what they have to play with when
they're learning something new.  And BSD is also very significant
in this rather powerful niche.  Both specifically because of their
price and because having the source available is a powerful learning
aid.

-- 
David Terrell           |  "Please note that calling an attacker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]            |  'lame' is not an approved security method."
http://wwn.nebcorp.com/ |    - Benjy Feen
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------