>>>>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:38:21 +0900,
>>>>> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> As requested, here are my comments about the addrselect-api draft.
One additional comment (I think this has not been pointed out by
anyone. sorry if not):
Using new flags for ai_flags of getaddrinfo() may have a compatibility
issue. RFC3493 says:
The ai_flags field to which hints parameter points shall be set to
zero or be the bitwise-inclusive OR of one or more of the values
AI_PASSIVE, AI_CANONNAME, AI_NUMERICHOST, AI_NUMERICSERV,
AI_V4MAPPED, AI_ALL, and AI_ADDRCONFIG.
I personally don't think this prohibits the use of other flags, but
some existing implementations seem to interpret this part in the
strictest way. Those return an error of EAI_BADFLAGS if an unknown
flag is specified in hints.ai_flags. getaddrinfo contained in BSD
variants and in the "libbind" library of ISC BIND behave this way.
For those implementations, applications that use this API extensions
will simply not be working, which is probably what we want to avoid.
However, I cannot think of any other solutions than having these
implementations change the behavior. So, we should probably first
agree on what the implementation should do for unknown flags and
describe the clarification in this document.
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
