ndt-users list created

["Jeff W. Boote" <>]

NDT is an open source project. Any and all developers interested in advancing 
NDT are welcome. That sounds like a great project for someone inclined to do 
so.

Any takers?

Thanks,
Jeff

On Apr 4, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Alan Whinery wrote:

> If you're going to instantiate code projects, why not move NDT toward
> Web10G instead?
> 
> On 4/5/2012 4:58 AM, 
> 
>  wrote:
>> The NDT google code project and distribution does not include web100
>> libraries. If the web100 project is no longer going to support
>> releases, we will need to consider how we will deal with that. Perhaps
>> another google code project could be started if there is enough
>> community interest in supporting it. (My opinion is that we should not
>> combine it with NDT.)
>> 
>> Jeff
>> 
>> Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G Slide
>> 
>> ----- Reply message -----
>> From: "Matt Mathis" 
>> <>
>> Date: Wed, Apr 4, 2012 11:41 am
>> Subject: IPv6 problems in web100.c
>> To: 
>> <>
>> Cc: "Josh Bailey" 
>> <>,
>>  
>> <>
>> 
>> 
>> Have you guys absorbed (a copy of) Web100 libraries?   These are
>> actually Web100 bugs, not NDT per se.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> --MM--
>> The best way to predict the future is to create it.  - Alan Kay
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Jason Zurawski
>> <>
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi Josh;
>>> 
>>> I would suggest filing an issue report on the google code site:
>>> 
>>> http://code.google.com/p/ndt
>>> 
>>> The maintainers can attempt to integrate this in the future.
>>> 
>>> Thanks;
>>> 
>>> -jason
>>> 
>>> On 4/4/12 12:42 AM, thus spake Josh Bailey:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> (bcc 
>>>> )
>>>> 
>>>> Hi all;
>>>> 
>>>> Wanted to hopefully save some others some time, by posting some patches
>>>> for some IPv6 problems I've found while working with NDT/web100.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm told that the web100 code is frozen now so here is the first patch
>>>> against web110.c.
>>>> 
>>>> The problem is that the code inserts an extraenous ":" when trying to
>>>> shorten an IPv6 address with consecutive zeros, resulting in an invalid
>>>> address.
>>>> 
>>>> There are some other problems (always writing an IPv4 connection_spec
>>>> struct even when IPv6 is being used for example, and giving junk
>>>> addresses). I'll post those patches seperately.
>>>> 
>>>> HTH,
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Josh Bailey
>> 
>> 
>