Re: The leftovers

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

At 10:25 18.01.00 -0800, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>At 04:24 PM 1/17/00 +0800, James Seng wrote:
>>Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>> > I don't understand what is supposed to go in this section. We have all
>> > the requirements above.
>>
>>I think there might be some very specific requirements on how gethostbyname()
>>might want to behave.
>
>gethostbyname() is not defined in any IETF standard. The IETF standardizes 
>protocols, not interfaces. This requirements document should not have 
>requirements for things that are not IETF standards.

Not a standard, but...
RFC 2553 Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6 specifies extensions to 
gethostbyname() and friends, as extensions to the base standard, POSIX 
(IEEE Std 1003g).



>>I believe the requirement document do not raise any security issues :-)
>
>Please read section 2.1 of RFC 2360 before you make such statements. I do 
>not want to see this requirements document be rejected by the IESG based 
>on your desire not to have a meaningful security considerations section.
And as I've said before - the requirements document SHOULD raise some 
security issues.

                   Harald

--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no