[AFS3-std] Re: XCB union decoding & IPvN address Conversation

[Derrick Brashear]

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Andrew Deason <adeason@sinenomine.net> wro=
te:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 09:15:59 -0500
> Jason Edgecombe <jason@rampaginggeek.com> wrote:
>
>> I got a little confused. =A0Was the IPvN address conversation put on
>> hold because the encoding needs to be worked out first? If so, I'm
>> assuming that the IPvN address discussion will be revisited when the
>> encoding is resolved. Is that correct?
>
> How are they different conversations? Discussing how we encode IPvN
> addresses on the wire is always what we were trying to solve. The latest
> discussions suggest putting them in a new primitive type (an 'extensible
> union' or whatever you want to call it). As far as I can tell, there are
> no more loose ends with the design of such a structure, and a draft
> could be written now.
>
> I'd write it myself if I didn't think Derrick was going to do it (and if
> I were better that writing these kinds of things).

My hope is to write something next week, I want to get the 1.6.0pre2
blob shoved out first, now that buildbot has finally given me a couple
uninterrupted days of love.


--=20
Derrick