Re: strange problem with ip6
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: strange problem with ip6 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20070517170008.GQ6907@phlogiston.dyndns.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | strange problem with ip6 (Brian Hirt <bhirt@mobygames.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: strange problem with ip6
Re: strange problem with ip6 |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 06:42:39PM +0200, Christian Kratzer wrote: > of a specific interface. This is why bsd based oprating systems append > %ifname to the address so that they know which Interface this address Oh, I forgot about that wart in RFC4007. Thanks for the cluestick. > There is propbaly not much point in using link local addreses for postgres. I think that's not quite right. For instance, JDBC can't use UNIX domain sockets last I checked, and I can imagine using it in a disconnected context where you'd want to emulate multiple connection points. Link local addresses would be perfect for this. So I think it might be a bug, because Postgres isn't accepting the address specification for scoped addresses. (In the local 8.1.x version I have installed here, the inet type doesn't accept it either.) Now that I re-read it, RFC4007 seems to be pretty clear that the scope info is a necessary part of the addressing, so I don't think it can be thrown away before looking at the address. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca I remember when computers were frustrating because they *did* exactly what you told them to. That actually seems sort of quaint now. --J.D. Baldwin
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: