Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 21:17:59 +0900 From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org> To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable-10@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r267874 - stable/10/lib/libc/net Message-ID: <yge7g43n9u0.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> In-Reply-To: <53AB0E0C.3050802@FreeBSD.org> References: <201406251710.s5PHAQ31026354@svn.freebsd.org> <53AB0E0C.3050802@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
>>>>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 21:59:40 +0400
>>>>> "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@FreeBSD.org> said:
melifaro> Well, two socket() calls has some predictable cost, but getaddrinfo()
melifaro> can be quite slow for system with many interfaces. It would be better to
melifaro> introduce some kernel sysctls to report IPv4/IPv6 status...
Yes, it should be better having some sysctls as you say.
melifaro> It looks like style(9) needs to be altered, too..
melifaro> This is not correct. RFC 3493 talks about "loopback address" (and
melifaro> specifies explicit IN6_IS_ADDR_LOOPBACK macro to test in IPv6 case) and
melifaro> not about loopback interface.
Yes, but the spec is still unclear about handling of link-local
address especially on loopback interface. We have to exclude
fe80::1%lo0 to make addrconfig() functional.
I've committed the change: r267912.
Sincerely,
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO
ume@mahoroba.org ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.mahoroba.org/~ume/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?yge7g43n9u0.wl%ume>