Subject: getaddrinfo (RFC 2553)

From: "Mohit Talwar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:44:28 -0700

hi all,

the spec is not very explicit about this, so i'd like
to make sure...

if (hints->ai_socktype is 0), it is meant to indicate
that the caller will accept any protocol.  

does this imply that if both UDP and TCP services
exist with the given name, getaddrinfo should return
addrinfo structures for both these protocols.  or 
should one choose a default protocol (say TCP) and
return only TCP addrinfo structures?

thanx,
mohit.

---

From: Jim Bound <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 10:11:31 -0400

Mohit,

>the spec is not very explicit about this, so i'd like

It sure is not.  I need to ask XNET why they let this hole exist?

>that the caller will accept any protocol. =20

I think it should be an ERROR.

>addrinfo structures for both these protocols.  or=20

I don't think picking a default is wise it should be an error.

thanks
/jim

thanx,
mohit.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C00314.28AC12AE
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.0.4417.0">
<TITLE>getaddrinfo (RFC 2553)</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>hi all,</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>the spec is not very explicit about this, so i'd =
like</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>to make sure...</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>if (hints-&gt;ai_socktype is 0), it is meant to =
indicate</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>that the caller will accept any protocol.&nbsp; =
</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>does this imply that if both UDP and TCP =
services</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>exist with the given name, getaddrinfo should =
return</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>addrinfo structures for both these protocols.&nbsp; =
or </FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>should one choose a default protocol (say TCP) =
and</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>return only TCP addrinfo structures?</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>thanx,</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>mohit.</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C00314.28AC12AE--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Vladislav Yasevich <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 10:32:53 -0400

Mohit

Look at draft-ietf-ipngwg-rfc2553bis-00.txt.  It is much
clearer on this issue.

> Mohit Talwar wrote:

The first answer would be correct.

> mohit.

-vlad 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vladislav Yasevich		Tel: (603) 884-1079
Compaq Computer Corp.		Fax: (435) 514-6884
110 Spit Brook Rd ZK03-3/T07
Nashua, NH 03062
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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, 11 Aug 2000 11:11:30 -0400

Vlad,

>Look at draft-ietf-ipngwg-rfc2553bis-00.txt.  It is much

Just clearer about being wrong.  I think it insane to let any API
specifiy 0 as socktype that is just ill-behaved IMO.

Mohit,

My input to still applies.  I want to ask XNET to tell us why they want
to permit this from an IEEE perspective it seems ill-behaved as a
strategy.

But my guess is we will support more and more stupid absurd garbage for
getaddrinfo() with consesus and design by committee in the IETF.  

Think about whats happening behind this basic API, getaddrinfo should
not be architected to be a middleware API.  That is plain bad
engineering and is where are headed now and I will keep my I told you so
card on this.

regards,
/jim