In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Narten
writes:
> I'm not involved in this in detail, so I may be off base, but my
> understanding is that the advanced API has not been picked up by Open
> Group because its members didn't support doing so -- they just didn't
> see a need to.
One shouldn't have to have OS specific knowledge to write
IPv6 code. Failure of POSIX to ratify the advanced API is
causing that to happen. This is not conjecture. It is fact.
We need more standisation not less.
The following was just committed to the BIND sources.
2463. [port] linux: POSIX doesn't include the IPv6 Advanced Socket
API and glibc hides parts of the IPv6 Advanced Socket
API as a result. This is stupid as it breaks how the
two halves (Basic and Advanced) of the IPv6 Socket API
were designed to be used but we have to live with it.
Define _GNU_SOURCE to pull in the IPv6 Advanced Socket
API. [RT #18388]
> My own take is that standardization of the advanced API just isn't
> compelling. When I did a survey in the past of what various vendors
> had done with the advanced API, I found that none implemented it
> completely. Rather, most implemented bits and pieces of it depending
> on what applications needed the funcitonality (or just implemented
> private versions for the applications that needed the
> functionality). And since the functionality in the adnvanced API (by
> definition) isn't needed accept by fairly exotic usages, it's hard to
> make the arguement that it needs to be implemented for basic
> interoperability.
>
> Thomas
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
