Re: [sipcore] IPv6 in the sip core wg

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

On 12/13/13 12:35 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> On 12/13/2013 11:19 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> [...]
>> It is a normative statement to use a particular API function as an
>> alternative to a different API function. But there was never a
>> requirement to use "gethostbyname", so the "instead" isn't meaningful,
>> and we shouldn't be requiring use of any particular API functions. It
>> would make a lot more sense if it had a MUST on the algorithms in 3484.
>
> Paul: No doubt true from specifying text in a standards-track RFC, but
> I suspect that most implementors are much more familiar with the
> differences between gethostbyname() and getaddrinfo() than they
> are with the arcana that getaddrinfo() implements rfc3484.

I would not object to this as an implementation note.
But it doesn't seem like a good way to state the normative requirement.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> [...]
>> At the very least, we should include that in the scope of the work.
>> Here is a revised milestone:
>>
>>      May 2014  WGLC of procedures to supplement RFC3263 and RFC6157 for
>>      dual-stack client and server handling of SIP URIs containing domain
>>      names (PS)
>
> Works for me.  Thanks for your time, Paul.
>
> Cheers,
>
> - vijay