Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report
От | Curt Sampson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.NEB.4.51.0301311053240.5220@angelic.cynic.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report (Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>) |
Ответы |
Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report
Re: Linux.conf.au 2003 Report |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Given that IPv6 is supposed to allow co-operation with IPv4, it seems > it'd be pretty hard to force such a view on every application using > IP addresses. DNS, for instance. Hm? DNS completely separates IPv4 and IPv6 addresses; they're different record types ("A" versus "AAAA") in the DNS "database". And the "interoperation" if IPv4 and IPv6 is pretty much not happening, if you're talking about the compatability addresses. I won't get into all the reasons why. All that said, I'm not advocating separating (or not separating) IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. I'm still undecided on the issue. I can see situations where I might want to store both together, but then again, I can see situations where I certainly wouldn't. Perhaps we should think about another example to try to illuminate this: what about storing ISO/OSI addresses in the same type as well? Isn't that just the same thing as storing IPv4 and IPv6 addresses together? cjs -- Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're alllight. --XTC
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: