Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

well, now i wish we hadn't gutted the ipv6 support

From: Paul A Vixie <vixie(at)mfnx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: well, now i wish we hadn't gutted the ipv6 support
Date: 2001-04-21 17:27:19
Message-ID: 200104211727.KAA12640@redpaul.mfnx.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
my original CIDR type implementation used BIND's inet_ntop() and inet_pton()
which therefore included latent support for ipv6.  it wouldn't take a huge
amount of effort to bring this back, would it?

(the user below is using VARCHAR for his ip addresses for this reason.)

------- Forwarded Message

Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 08:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200104201537(dot)IAA26178(at)gulag(dot)araneus(dot)fi>
To: Paul A Vixie <vixie(at)mfnx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Appliance caching server configuration database schema 
In-Reply-To: <200104200314(dot)UAA73417(at)redpaul(dot)mfnx(dot)net>
From: gson(at)nominum(dot)com (Andreas Gustafsson)

Paul A. Vixie writes:
> you can use INET or CIDR for your addresses since this is postgres.

I would if it supported IPv6 addresses.

------- End of Forwarded Message


Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-04-21 17:29:13
Subject: Re: setuid(geteuid());?
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2001-04-21 17:17:34
Subject: Re: setuid(geteuid());?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group