>>>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:25:07 +0100 (CET),
>>>>> Erik Nordmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > Are there TCP applications which use RFC 2292 style for accessing received
>> > extension headers?
>> > I thought we had concluded that no TCP applications existed that access
>> > the received stuff (even tough telnet can set things like routing headers
>> > for transmit).
>>
>> Okay, compatibility to existing applications should actually not
>> matter.
> I had a more fundamental question: does there exist even one TCP application
> which receives extension headers?
> I haven't seen one.
I still seemed to be unclear...No, I've never seen one, either.
(There was actually one (and only one) TCP application that tried to
get receiving interface at the accept() time. It was a BGP4+ daemon,
which needed the interface to disambiguate link-local peers. However,
we now have the sin6_scope_id field in sockaddr_in6{} and do not need
the information for this purpose.)
> You seemed to say that such exist. If they do it would be useful to
> look at those TCP applications to see what they are trying to do
> and which flavor of the API fits better.
> And if they exist it might not make sense to remove everything about
> TCP applications receiving extension headers from the spec.
Agreed. But (again) I've never seen such applications with the
exception above, which does actually not need the receive info using
the current basic API. I can't imagine such applications in a
foreseeable future either.
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
