-8<-
1. RFC3484 s6 rule 9 should not be applied to IPv4 addresses
by Debian systems, and we DO overrule the maintainer.
2. RFC3484 s6 rule 9 should not be applied to IPv6 addresses
by Debian systems. We do NOT overrule the maintainer.
3. We recommend to the IETF that RFC3484 s6 rule 9 should be
abolished for IPv4, and that it should be reconsidered for IPv6.
-8<-
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[1] Choice X: Do not use rule 9, overrule maintainer, etc., as above.
[3] Choice S: Sort IPv4 addrs according to rule 9 in getaddrinfo
[3] Choice M: Leave the choice up to the maintainers.
[2] Choice F: Further discussion
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I am not sure it is right to just leave things to the
maintainers, no matter what they chose, once we have been called in to
make a ruling.
And I think we should advocate the behaviour we consider to be
better when we make the ruling, whether or not we are changing Etch as
well (personally, I would consider changing behaviour in Etch in a
later point release, depending on the fallout of the change made in
unstable).
manoj
--
You will wish you hadn't.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Attachment:
pgpbZVh8eXzL2.pgp
Description: PGP signature