>I see this thread has gotten a bit spicy already. I'll see if I can ask
>some questions in a bland manner. :-)
>
>I think the concern I'm hearing about the IRS implementation is not that
>it wasn't invented here, but that it does something we already do. So why
>should we switch? There may be very good reasons to switch, but I don't
>think they have been given. "We should use it because BIND uses it," is as
>wrong as "We should not use it because we've always used nsswitch."
>
>So what advantages are there if IRS over nsswitch? I realize there's the
>definite BIND integration issue of not haveing to make BIND work with
>nsswitch. What else?
>
>Take care,

	what i do care in IRS implementation is net_data portion.  it manages
	data that are needed to be thread-specific, and manages name lookup
	function dispatches.  nsdispatch/nsswitch does not have anything
	about the former portion.  as we start providing thread-safe library
	implementations, we will need to re-do what ISC did with net_data.

itojun