[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: new network config (was: Re: network configuration)



On Fri, Feb 05, 1999 at 02:17:53PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > I personally think the space delimeted style of fstab and friends looks
> > > better, but if I can get away with not having to write this, I'm not
> > > going to complain too much however it ends up. :)
> > using : or spaces/tabs doesn't make much difference to me. if : is a
> > problem for future compatibility with ipv6 then i'll switch to spaces.
> Erm, but : is a standard for ports! Like
> http://foo.bar:80/
> If someone decides to use :'s for IPv6 address seperation then all sorts
> of nasty stuff breaks.

Errr.

Ummm.

I got the impression from my introduction to IPv6 that you really weren't
mean to use IPs very much at all -- clients get dynamically assigned
numbers, and the routers are meant to be able to dynamically reassign
those numbers whenever the router's admin sees fit, without having to
manually change the client.

So I guess the idea is you use "host*name*:port" and use different
notation for "ip & port" whenever it's necessary (ie, doing ipchains,
and setting up the interface in the first place).

I'm not particularly sure of this however.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
  for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''

Attachment: pgpBJScecyTAh.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: