Subject: Re: IPv6 RPC
To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <>
From: Frank van der Linden <>
List: tech-net
Date: 02/19/2001 15:38:31
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 08:58:08PM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> 	a new draft about IPv6 RPC is submitted.  are we conformant to this?
> >        Title           : IPv6 extension to RPC
> >        Author(s)       : S. Majee, P. Park
> >        Filename        : draft-smajee-rpc-ipv6-00.txt
> >        Pages           : 13
> >        Date            : 16-Feb-01

Forgot that this one was just cc-ed to me, so I already responded to
Itojun privately. Anyway, here's a longer version:

This draft isn't really much of a standard, it just describes some
issues. It's basically saying "if you must to use TS-RPC, note that
X and Y, but it's better to use TI-RPC, because it has A and Z".

I implemented TI-RPC, but on top of sockets, not TLI. This is
not visible in the interface itself. The filedescriptors come
from socket calls, not t_* calls, of course. And the old
TS-RPC interface is still there, but it only works for v4. The
only issue with this approach is, that 3rd party source code may only
expect TI-RPC to be present if TLI/XTI is also present, and vice versa.
Like amd does, currently, it uses TI-RPC if HAVE_TLI is defined,
but that's not right for us.

- Frank

Frank van der Linden                 
Quality NetBSD CDs, Support & Service.