Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 11/7/16 1:13 AM, Haribabu Kommi wrote: >>> Yes, I agree that default zone is the main use case of the original thread. >>> From the RFC 4007, the default zone is used for the global addresses, >>> This may be the main use case with zone id. How about currently just >>> ignoring it and store the actual IP address with the attached patch and >>> handle the rest of the actual zone id support later once the it gets >>> properly standardized?
>> Well, according to the RFC, the default zone is 0 "typically", which is >> a very weak requirement. So just ignoring it is probably also not right. >> So far we have only heard one use case for any of this, which is someone >> wanting to store ::1%0, which is not even a valid address according to >> that same RFC. So this is all on very weak ground. >> I think we should just forget about this. It's all a bit too dubious. > +1. Agreed, let's wait until more standardization emerges. Anything we do now risks painting ourselves into a corner, and there is not so much demand for a feature in this area that we need to do something about it Right Now. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers