MiNiFi Target audience

["Marc P." <ma...@gmail.com>]

Good Afternoon,
   Given the plethora of devices that MiNiFi may be installed onto, would
it make sense to ensure we support IPv4 and IPv6?

 For example, when searching for IPv4 tickets I found the following JIRA
ticket that indicates we'll support IPv4. I'm abstracting some of the
socket communications into an abstract facade to facilitate unit and
integration testing more easily -- and simply to consolidate the code into
a more maintainable format.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFI-159

Upon seeing this the code will not work with IPv6. Is this intentional?
Should we change this to support either? We can retrieve the hostname
regardless of the internet protocol version.

Without further input my intent would be change to using getaddrinfo(...)
withint MiNiFi-cpp. Would love to hear a discussion on whether making this
change goes against the intent of the software.

While we may not support IPv6 now, the code that exists now is more
resilient, and is therefore on my radar to reduce artifacts.

   Thanks,
   Marc "aka. Marc"

Re: MiNiFi Target audience

[Andre <an...@fucs.org>]

Marc,

I would say that lack IPv6 support was not intentional and certainly in
favor of addressing it.

Cheers


On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 6:00 AM, Marc P. <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Good Afternoon,
>    Given the plethora of devices that MiNiFi may be installed onto, would
> it make sense to ensure we support IPv4 and IPv6?
>
>  For example, when searching for IPv4 tickets I found the following JIRA
> ticket that indicates we'll support IPv4. I'm abstracting some of the
> socket communications into an abstract facade to facilitate unit and
> integration testing more easily -- and simply to consolidate the code into
> a more maintainable format.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFI-159
>
> Upon seeing this the code will not work with IPv6. Is this intentional?
> Should we change this to support either? We can retrieve the hostname
> regardless of the internet protocol version.
>
> Without further input my intent would be change to using getaddrinfo(...)
> withint MiNiFi-cpp. Would love to hear a discussion on whether making this
> change goes against the intent of the software.
>
> While we may not support IPv6 now, the code that exists now is more
> resilient, and is therefore on my radar to reduce artifacts.
>
>    Thanks,
>    Marc "aka. Marc"
>

Re: MiNiFi Target audience

[Aldrin Piri <al...@gmail.com>]

Hey Marc,

I don't think there was an explicit decision made, nor should there be, to
preclude usage of IPv6, likely just a bit of shortsightedness.  Certainly
we should be flexible to support both especially when tending to matters
driving adoption of IPv6.


On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Marc P. <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Good Afternoon,
>    Given the plethora of devices that MiNiFi may be installed onto, would
> it make sense to ensure we support IPv4 and IPv6?
>
>  For example, when searching for IPv4 tickets I found the following JIRA
> ticket that indicates we'll support IPv4. I'm abstracting some of the
> socket communications into an abstract facade to facilitate unit and
> integration testing more easily -- and simply to consolidate the code into
> a more maintainable format.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFI-159
>
> Upon seeing this the code will not work with IPv6. Is this intentional?
> Should we change this to support either? We can retrieve the hostname
> regardless of the internet protocol version.
>
> Without further input my intent would be change to using getaddrinfo(...)
> withint MiNiFi-cpp. Would love to hear a discussion on whether making this
> change goes against the intent of the software.
>
> While we may not support IPv6 now, the code that exists now is more
> resilient, and is therefore on my radar to reduce artifacts.
>
>    Thanks,
>    Marc "aka. Marc"
>