Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:50:47 -0500 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't imply TCP and UDP socket options are bitmasks Message-ID: <CAF6rxgkGVF0a-t8ek0rA05bCmE6NkaiYkDxf1zBKJft7VrEobA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201301141550.13577.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201301141550.13577.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 January 2013 15:50, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > Using a bitmask forces us to run out of bits and makes it > harder for vendors to try to use a high range of values for local custom > options (hoping that they never conflict with a new option value added in > stock FreeBSD). We should explicitly decide and #define the boundary value for custom options. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgkGVF0a-t8ek0rA05bCmE6NkaiYkDxf1zBKJft7VrEobA>