Re: sockets APIs extensions for Host Identity Protocol

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Wed, 09 May 2007 19:57 UTC

Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HlsHh-0005LC-6Y; Wed, 09 May 2007 15:57:13 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HlsHf-0005L0-F5 for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 09 May 2007 15:57:11 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HlsHf-0005Kr-5d for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Wed, 09 May 2007 15:57:11 -0400
Received: from virtual3.netaktiv.com ([80.67.170.53] helo=mail.bortzmeyer.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HlsHd-00080R-Sq for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Wed, 09 May 2007 15:57:11 -0400
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 785C9240822; Wed, 9 May 2007 21:57:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C858011729; Wed, 9 May 2007 21:53:19 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 21:53:19 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Subject: Re: sockets APIs extensions for Host Identity Protocol
Message-ID: <20070509195319.GA3926@sources.org>
References: <Pine.SOL.4.64.0705041801060.14418@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi> <20070507082737.GB21759@nic.fr> <46413DD7.8020702@cs.utk.edu> <20070509121703.GA21070@nic.fr> <200705091727.NAA22503@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200705091727.NAA22503@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 3.1
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols <discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org

On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 01:21:45PM -0400,
 der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> wrote 
 a message of 38 lines which said:

> > They should work the same with both level-3 protocols (and,
> > indeed, they do, in every language but C).
> 
> Oh, nonsense.  

Simple exaggeration.

> Not every non-C language encapsulates those details sufficiently to
> keep applications away from them.  I've seen perl code,

OK, OK, not all languages are better than C in that respect. But I do
not want to mention only Java, as some people keep repeating. Many
languages offer a similar high-level API (Python, Lua, Haskell, Ruby,
...).