Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 11:24:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: "JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H?(B" <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>, Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CFR: m_tag patch Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0210161122540.82978-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20021016111857.A38181@carp.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 03:07:07AM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H?(B wrote: > ... > > (I re-read the thread) perhaps the example in my previous message > > wasn't good (and it was at least incorrect). According to the > > discussion on the thread, we'll probably keep m_tag_cookie being 0 and > > use m_tag_id in (e.g.) ip6_output.c. So, we'll be happy if this > > convention is kept (and will be kept) at least under netinet6. > > unfortunately this will not prevent code from having to check that > the m_tag_cookie actually corresponds to the value you want, to > make sure that your code does not misinterpret as own tags > generated/destined to other clients. > > Am I correct, Sam ? yes but this is always done with macros, and the OpenBSD compatible macros also check for the correct cookie value. > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0210161122540.82978-100000>