| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Port registration (was Re: [pcp] QA status) |
| From: | "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:47:56 -0500 |
| Cc: | Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, PCP <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <603161407.8469846.1361751766628.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <5127EDD6.8040507@xxxxxxxxxx> <603161407.8469846.1361751766628.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.2i |
Hi - On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 07:22:46PM -0500, Nathan Scott wrote: > [...] Probably a good idea if you guys form a posse and request all > of the ones we know we need in the short term in one hit (ipv6 in pmcd, > pmproxy?, pmwebapi daemon? x2-for-ipv6?). One should not require a separate port# for ipv6; don't confuse separate kernel-level socket FDs with separate tcp port #s. - FChE |
| Previous by Date: | Port registration (was Re: [pcp] QA status), Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Port registration (was Re: [pcp] QA status), Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Port registration (was Re: [pcp] QA status), Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Port registration (was Re: [pcp] QA status), Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |