> get off the soap box... IPv6 requires a new API, so there is no valid > argument that we are not changing it. If you want to argue that we > should minimize the changes, I would agree.
believe it or not there are already lots of progams using the v6 API... many of which were very slight modifications to v4 programs. I'm happy that IESG has decided not to insist on temp addresses as the default and has backed the idea that there should be an API to request them. Now, who's going to define the API extension? Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
