From owner-cvs-include  Fri Dec  6 09:46:03 1996
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-include>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id JAA02327
          for cvs-include-outgoing; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 09:46:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alpha.xerox.com (alpha.Xerox.COM [13.1.64.93])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id JAA02300;
          Fri, 6 Dec 1996 09:45:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crevenia.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.116.11]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <23142(1)>; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 09:44:24 PST
Received: from localhost by crevenia.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <177711>; Fri, 6 Dec 1996 09:10:46 -0800
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
cc: CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org,
        cvs-include@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include utmp.h 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 05 Dec 96 11:06:14 PST."
             <9893.849812774@time.cdrom.com> 
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 09:10:31 PST
From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Dec6.091046pst.177711@crevenia.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-cvs-include@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <9893.849812774@time.cdrom.com> you write:
>Simple questions:  Is there concensus for bumping UT_HOSTSIZE to the
>next increment?  32 or 64?  What about the other fields that Peter
>suggested?

I think that the host address would be extremely useful, so that there's
a uniform representation of the host address that a program can get to.
I don't think it should be a struct in_addr, though, since we don't want
to have to change again when IPv6 comes around, so perhaps it should be
an (ugh) 20-byte sockaddr.

A bigger UT_HOSTSIZE makes some sense, but given the host address field it's
not necessarily critical.

  Bill