[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140603081558.GL31947@example.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 10:15:58 +0200
From: u-igbb@...ey.se
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: RFC 3484 goals: partial or full coverage?
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 11:29:09PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> Ideally I'd like to avoid adding more than ~500 bytes of code size to
> libc (and static binaries using it) to make this stuff work, and I
> certainly don't want to add runtime costs that are unreasonable to
> many users. But choosing whether to return v4 or v6 results first
> (this is one of the most visible effects of the whole procedure) seems
> pretty important from a sense of not pessimizing systems that have
> both v4 and v6 but where using one is much worse than the other.
+1
Rune
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
