> On 5 May 2017, at 18:36, Michael McMahon <michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > On 05/05/2017, 18:30, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>> On 5 May 2017, at 18:29, Michael McMahon<michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com> >>> wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> Do you mean if the Inet6Address passed in has zero for the scope_id that the >>> search should ignore it, and do what happens now, ie. return the first >>> address found? >> Yes, that is what I wanted to say. Does it make sense? >> >> -Chris. >> > Yes, I think so. It's not unreasonable to have an address that might be unique > on the local system and in some circumstances might not need a scope id. > So, a scope id of zero would never match then. > > I won't regenerate the webrev but just change the condition to: > > if (scopeid != 0 && scopeid != ((struct > sockaddr_in6*)addrP->addr)->sin6_scope_id) > break;
Looks good. -Chris.
