Subject: (ngtrans) draft-sylee-bia-00.txt comment

From: Stig Ven�s <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:14:26 +0100

There was a question at the meeting whether addresses should be per
host, per process or whatever. The draft suggests using
0.0.0.0 ~ 0.0.0.255. I think the easiest would be to have addresses
per pid and use say 0.P1.P2.0 - 0.P1.P2.255 per process where P1 P2
are the 16 bits of the process id.

Stig

---

From: "Matt Crawford" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:32:48 -0600

Your process ids are still only 16 bits?  We've got some systems where
it takes 16 bits to enumerate the CPUs, and 32 for the processes.

---

From: Stig Ven�s <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:35:32 +0100

> it takes 16 bits to enumerate the CPUs, and 32 for the processes.

Right, I guess I'm a bit old fashioned (: If only IP-addresses had
more bits....

Stig

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:37:46 -0600

Only for operating systems that have a 16 bit PID. And does that make the
scope of the pseudo-address a process, or a process group? There will
certainly be legacy applications that pass addresses between members
of a process group.

  Brian