Re: [openssl/openssl] bio_dgram vs IPv6

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

 



Michael Wojcik <Michael.Wojcik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    > The RFC specifically mentions using this API to retrieve and set
    > addresses, so it seems like a fix for issue 5257 does need to use it,
    > if that's to be done in a portable way.

    > 3542 is only Informational, but I'd expect most or all platforms with
    > IPv6 support to conform to it.

The issue isn't whether we can expect it to be standard.
The issue is what we can use as a signal that the header exists.
To date, I don't think that openssl has had to know if IPv6 existed or not on
a particular platform.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux