On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:06:48 +0400 (MSD)
>
> No, really! __Sharing__ of port space between IPv4 and IPv6 was mad
> idea. It cannot generalized to other protocol families.
>
> So, IPV6_V6ONLY is really unique for IPv6. Well, actually, it could
> be negated: be default and the option would be called
> IPV6_SHARE_THIS_PORT_TO_IPV4.
>
> I think what I want to really say is that I want to provide
> way for ipv4 application to say "no ipv6 connections on this
> listening socket please".
>
> So does it make no sense at all to have IP_V4ONLY?
Umm, I think an app guy can do that with creating an AF_INET socket; there
will not be IPv6 there. Folks Who Think They Know Best decided that dual
use for AF_INET6 would be best, and IPV6_V6ONLY was invented (note: it'd
already implemented by some others) to repair that.
--
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
|