Subject: Re: Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6, <draft-ietf-ipngwg-rfc2553bis-03.txt>

From: Jack McCann <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:59:12 -0400 (EDT)

> At the moment IBM does not plan to include NI_NUMERICSCOPE in our
> implementation of getnameinfo.  Comments on this interpretation of
> the draft would be appreciated.

I think the idea is that getnameinfo() will attempt to translate the
value in the sin6_scope_id field into a text string.  See section 12 in
draft-ietf-ipngwg-scoping-arch-02.txt.  The NI_NUMERICSCOPE flag says
don't bother trying to lookup the zone name (e.g. "fe80::abc%link1"),
just display the numeric form of the sin6_scope_id (e.g. "fe80::abc%1").

[As an aside, NI_NUMERICSCOPE seems like a bit of overkill, I wonder
 why we didn't just extend NI_NUMERICHOST to cover the scope id...]

>Further, can anyone elaborate on the meaning of NI_DGRAM.  The draft does
>not provide an
>explanation of what this flag means.  Again thanks for any comments.

Did you see this text in the draft, just a few lines below the NI_DGRAM
definition?

  2.  The NI_DGRAM flag is required for the new AF_INET/AF_INET6 port
      numbers (for example, 512-514) that represent different services
      for UDP and TCP.

Without the flag, what value do you return for port 512: biff or exec?

- Jack McCann
  Compaq Tru64 UNIX Networking

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------