majke 20 minutes ago Falsehoods programmers think about addresses:- parsing addresses is well defined (try parsing ::1%3)- since 127.0.0.2 is on loopback, ::2 surely also would be- interface number on Linux is unique- unix domain socket names are zero-terminated (abstract are not)- sin6_flowinfo matters (it doens;t unless you opt-in with setsockopt)- sin6_scope_id matters (it doesn't unless on site-local range)(I wonder if scope_id would work on ipv4-mapped-IPv6, but if I remember right I checked and it didn't)- In ipv4, scope_id doesnt exist (true but it can be achieved by binding to interface)and so on...Years ago I tried to document all the quirks I knew about https://idea.popcount.org/2019-12-06-addressing/ sunshowers 5 minutes ago Thanks. At Oxide we do use the scope ID quite a bit, as my colleague Cliff Biffle says here: https://hachyderm.io/@cliffle/115492946627058792
sunshowers 5 minutes ago Thanks. At Oxide we do use the scope ID quite a bit, as my colleague Cliff Biffle says here: https://hachyderm.io/@cliffle/115492946627058792
Falsehoods programmers think about addresses:
- parsing addresses is well defined (try parsing ::1%3)
- since 127.0.0.2 is on loopback, ::2 surely also would be
- interface number on Linux is unique
- unix domain socket names are zero-terminated (abstract are not)
- sin6_flowinfo matters (it doens;t unless you opt-in with setsockopt)
- sin6_scope_id matters (it doesn't unless on site-local range)
(I wonder if scope_id would work on ipv4-mapped-IPv6, but if I remember right I checked and it didn't)
- In ipv4, scope_id doesnt exist (true but it can be achieved by binding to interface)
and so on...
Years ago I tried to document all the quirks I knew about https://idea.popcount.org/2019-12-06-addressing/
Thanks. At Oxide we do use the scope ID quite a bit, as my colleague Cliff Biffle says here: https://hachyderm.io/@cliffle/115492946627058792