Seems simple enough to me -- no problem from my part. I personally can't
see the need for non-Internet service name lookups, but I wasn't sure what
you were referring to in any case. So I guess that should be either
removed, or expanded to describe the specific scenario better.
more or less editorial issues
-----------------------------
==> I'd add IPR boilerplates, copyright sections etc. at the end.
Multiple protocol support in getnameinfo API
==> s/protocol support/Protocol Support/
(similar elsewhere)
Abstract
IPv6 basic API [Gilligan, 2003] defines protocol-independent API for
address-to-string conversion, i.e. getnameinfo(3). Current
==> no references in the abstract.
==> I'd probably use "getnameinfo()" rather than "getnameinfo(3)"
HAGINO Expires: August 5, 2004 [Page 1]
L
DRAFT multiprotocol getnameinfo February 2004
==> "multiprotocol getnameinfo" should probably be reworded to be a bit
fancier :)
does not hold due to multiple reasons, such as (1) there are other
transport protocols coming up like SCTP and DCCP and SOCK_xx and
==> remove "coming up" -- aren't they already there...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
