IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: sockets APIs extensions for Host Identity Protocol

der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> Fri, 11 May 2007 13:14 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 1HmUxK-0005QW-6D; Fri, 11 May 2007 09:14:46 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HmUxI-0005QQ-OP for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 09:14:44 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HmUxI-0005QF-El for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 09:14:44 -0400
Received: from sparkle.rodents.montreal.qc.ca ([216.46.5.7]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HmUxH-00088l-0f for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 09:14:44 -0400
Received: (from mouse@localhost) by Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17866; Fri, 11 May 2007 09:14:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Message-Id: <200705111314.JAA17866@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Erik-Conspiracy: There is no Conspiracy - and if there were I wouldn't be part of it anyway.
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft: the company who gave us the botnet zombies.
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 09:08:26 -0400
To: discuss@apps.ietf.org
Subject: Re: sockets APIs extensions for Host Identity Protocol
In-Reply-To: <46442588.7020405@cs.utk.edu>
References: <Pine.SOL.4.64.0705041801060.14418@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi> <20070507082737.GB21759@nic.fr> <46413DD7.8020702@cs.utk.edu> <20070509121703.GA21070@nic.fr> <4641CA52.70504@cs.utk.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705091449360.26169@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <4641D94C.9070304@cs.utk.edu> <Pine.SOL.4.64.0705102013550.10049@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi> <46436B10.5090706@cs.utk.edu> <Pine.SOL.4.64.0705102159020.10049@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi> <4643F873.3000501@cs.utk.edu> <Pine.SOL.4.64.0705110851440.24038@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi> <46442588.7020405@cs.utk.edu>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad
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

> more generally, getaddrinfo() sucks so bad that any excuse to get rid
> of it is worth considering.

What do you see as wrong with it?  (Not that I disagree; I see it as
having problems too.  But I sure see it as a lot better than forcing
application code to know about all the possible address families - sort
of "the worst interface available except for all the others".  I'm just
interested in what might be wrong with it that I haven't noticed.)

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email