On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> >In 1.5_ALPHA, neither '0' nor '127.1' work as IP numbers, whereas
> >'0.0.0.0' and '127.0.0.1' work. What's the idea behind this?
> 
> 	this is because we switched name resolution code in telnet(1) from
> 	inet_aton(3) to getaddrinfo(3).  getaddrinfo(3) is specified to take
> 	full dot-quad only.  do we need to provide backward compatibility
> 	for this?  if so, we need to perform:
> 		inet_aton -> inet_ntop -> getaddrinfo

I sure wouldn't mind backward compatibility. (And compatibility with
existing systems that allow this syntax, e.g. Solaris)
IMHO it's better than giving back an error.


 - Hubert

-- 
NetBSD - because Unix isn't just #include <linux.h>, i386, ILP32, ELF, ...!