ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: AI_SECURE_CANONNAME, AI_CANONNAME_SEARCH_* (Re: getaddrinfo()and searching)

2007-10-02 08:22:22
It seems that policy should be scenario / use case / mission dependent,
and consequently apply to a number of applications. (And thus be
application independent). 


Bonnie L. Gorsic
Technical Fellow
SoS Architecture & Engineering
714-762-4906 (desk)


-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu] 
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 8:35 PM
To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; 
200709270133(_dot_)l8R1XuB6060071(_at_)drugs(_dot_)dv(_dot_)isc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: AI_SECURE_CANONNAME, AI_CANONNAME_SEARCH_* (Re:
getaddrinfo()and searching)

Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
What a timely thread.

I've recently concluded that we need an extension to getaddrinfo() 
along these lines, but I'm looking for somewhat tighter and more 
generic semantics.

My proposal is to add an AI_SECURE_CANONNAME flag with the following
semantics:
    

      do not try to implement policy into applications.  you will end
up
      forced to (?) rewrite every existing applications.
  
perhaps, but having the policy be application-independent doesn't make
sense either.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf