Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:06:11 -0800 | From | (John Myers) | Subject | Re: PF_INET6 on non-ipv6 kernels |
| |
Magnus Ahltorp wrote: > IPv4-mapped > IPv6 addresses are a feature of the IPv6 API. If you don't enable the > IPv6 API, you will not be able to use its features.
My request is to enable the IPv6 API whenever the IPv4 code is enabled.
> A much more valid request is to enable IPv6 by default in the > kernel.
This would work, as long as IPv6 cannot be disabled without also disabling IPv4.
Keith Owens wrote: > But if you are going to add your own compatibility layer anyway for > non-IPv6 systems, why not use the same layer for systems which may or > may not have IPv6?
Because it is much simpler and cleaner to choose the implementation of the comatibility layer at compile time. Having to make this choice at runtime makes code inefficient and hard to maintain.
> It strikes > me that this is application policy and should be dealt with in the app, > not the kernel.
What on earth is your definiton of "application policy?"
This is akin to saying that "if the kernel is built with this option, you have to use a struct direct, otherwise you have to use a struct dirent." This is not "policy", this is "working around kernel limitations." We applications engineers hate you kernel engineers for making us go through crap like this.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |