From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: follow-up: discrepancy with POSIX Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:04:39 -0700 Message-ID: <46F156A7.5000304@redhat.com> References: <46F13E8B.4050309@redhat.com> <46F15305.2030507@redhat.com> <20070919.095251.45154496.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:33600 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750871AbXISU0g (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:26:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070919.095251.45154496.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Miller wrote: > It just occured to me that AF_UNSPEC might be used simply > because "all zeros" might be a valid real bindable address > for some address family. And using AF_UNSPEC avoids that > problem entirely. Yes, but for IPv4/6 it's not an issue. Some implementations might handle all-zeros and the spec _currently_ calls for it. In this case a= n alignment would be good. I guess I'll just go ahead and file a problem report with the spec. Maybe the Unix vendors will test their implementations in provide feedb= ack. - -- =E2=9E=A7 Ulrich Drepper =E2=9E=A7 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=9E=A7 444 Castro S= t =E2=9E=A7 Mountain View, CA =E2=9D=96 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG8Vam2ijCOnn/RHQRAlw2AJwPCkD/GdX5YWCjsidhNXkGT71SiQCeLUDX XimSWS2NMI9T8QxnnV3FDQ4=3D =3D8XbG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----