On 2010-06-17 12:55, David Conrad wrote:
Well, yes. However, applications already have to be modified to deal with
IPv6. I'd agree that modifying applications from a simple synchronous path
to dealing with parallel asynchronous connections would not be a good idea.
Personally, I'm of the strong opinion that the socket() API is fundamentally
broken as is the separation of naming lookup from connection
initiation/address management. In the vast majority of cases, applications
should not know or care what about anything but the destination name/service.
As I understand it, new APIs are evolving towards something conceptually like
connection_id = connect_by_name( hostname, service )
allowing the kernel to manage the address, expiration of the address, name to
address mapping change, etc. transparently to the application.
Exactly. One rule of thumb I've been following regarding migrating
applications to IPv6 is to banish the use of struct sockaddr (and
variants such as _in, _in6, _storage, etc.). If you never use that
structure, your app is probably IPv6-ready, or very close to it.
Simon
--
NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
vCard 4.0 --> http://www.vcarddav.org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf