Re: IPv6 patch

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rocco Altier <RoccoA(at)Routescape(dot)com>, Nigel Kukard <nkukard(at)lbsd(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: IPv6 patch
Date: 2003-01-28 02:06:11
Message-ID: 1043719571.8713.35.camel@tokyo
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 20:19, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I had someone on the IPv6 IRC channel interested, but haven't seen any
> patch yet. It isn't that hard to do.

If we cleanly split the Postgres-specific code from the stuff that's
been imported from BIND, shouldn't it be easy to import new versions,
and thus get IPv6 support for free?

Or at least, that's what I vaguely recall Paul Vixie saying on
pgsql-patches a while ago:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200202221828.g1MISX102055%40candle.pha.pa.us&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpaul%2Bvixie%2Bgroup:comp.databases.postgresql.patches%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D200202221828.g1MISX102055%2540candle.pha.pa.us%26rnum%3D2

Cheers,

Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-28 02:07:34 Re: IPv6 patch
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-28 01:19:35 Re: IPv6 patch