(this is about PF_LOCAL support for getaddrinfo/getnameinfo)

	we had a local discussion within KAME.  we do not really like to
	support PF_LOCAL, unless there's clear standard behavior for AF_LOCAL
	case.  for AF independent programming point of view, unlink(2) call
	issue is really bitching us.  also, we cannot just add incompatible
	functionality from others (note that glibc now drops it,
	so we are now compatible with glibc at this point).  getaddrinfo/
	getnameinfo behavior itself is rather vaguely defined in the standards
	(POSIX drafts as well as RFC2553/bis), and we don't want to add
	more jitter to it.

	so if you want it - get the POSIX guys to document getaddrinfo/
	getnameinfo behavior for PF_LOCAL, exactly and explicitly.

itojun