pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] IPv6 For libpcp_pmda

To: Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] IPv6 For libpcp_pmda
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 18:30:17 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: PCP <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <519BB528.5040009@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <51911381.2060600@xxxxxxxxxx> <152876642.1184024.1368503522352.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <519BB528.5040009@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: ZzGl4taTnX9Eao/VNf6Z8lq5l3bxMA==
Thread-topic: IPv6 For libpcp_pmda
Hi Dave,

----- Original Message -----
> On 05/13/2013 11:52 PM, Nathan Scott wrote:
> >
> > The PMDA/PMCD relationship is quite a bit different to the client/pmcd
> > relationship - its one-to-one (noone else will be communicating on this
> > channel) and is much more controlled.  So, I don't think opening ports
> > for both ipv6 and inet is warranted in the PMDA case, and this should
> > simplify things.  Back-compatibility is required, and this ipv6 option
> > should be available transparently to all PMDAs that support sockets.
> As posted to the project list, I've added a -6 option to pmdaGetOpt()
> for requesting an IPv6 socket. Should I go ahead and a "6:" to the
> option strings of all the callers as well?

Sounds right.  Usage messages and man pages will also be affected.

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>