Subject: (IPng 7291) Re: Ipv6 Migration

From: David Borman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 15:25:06 -0600 (CST)

Jim,

> From: Jim Bound <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 16:11:32 -0500
> ...
> Forgot to put my :-) face on the statement.  
>
> And we support getaddrinfo too it is required.

That's fine, I've known for some time that you weren't fond of
getaddrinfo().  I guess I saw your statement as an oppertunity
to remind everyone that though most of the changes to the API
have had to do with the creation of getipnodebyname(), there is
still the getaddrinfo() function that can provide a cleaner
solution to some problems.

> But I don't care about any address family but AF_INET and AF_NET6.
>
> if another one is invented I won't work on it, and that means IPv6
> failed.  If that happens I probably will go fishing.

*If* another one is invented, then *when* it is invented will
indicate whether IPv6 was a success or not.  And if there does
become need for one, I hope that by that time I'll also be
spending my time fishing (or golfing, or working in my woodshop
or darkroom)  :-)

And I appreciate all that you have done on getting the new
API out.  Thanks for all your hard work.

			-David Borman, [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Jim Bound <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 18:00:47 -0500

David,

ACK... and on the golf too.......

thanks
/jim