On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 05:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It should be something like that, but I think Alain was suggesting that
a node-based policy would not be sufficient.  It should be at least
application based policy, since different applications will not
work with 3041 addresses.

br,
John
And even 'application based' is not enough. Think about an application
like netscape. As a web browser, in its dialog to web servers, it may want
to benefit from 3041. As a Mail user agent, when talking to its SMTP server,
it may want not to use 3041 because the anti-spam rules might reject its
mail (no reverse path DNS records), when talking to a FTP server,it may
also be rejected for the same reason.

So a socket option seems to me the right way to toggle 3041 on and off.

- Alain.

ps: btw, in case of application level failure as described above,
should the app that was using 3041 retry with a regular address?

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

Reply via email to