From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 7 04:41:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 912281065673 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 04:41:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600518FC0C for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 04:41:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D8F1061A6; Wed, 7 May 2008 00:41:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 07 May 2008 00:41:53 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: tHFvPowkjopVB+Y7KdoefyT1dz3onZVkBJhFYOxzvKdA 1210135313 Received: from [192.168.123.18] (82-35-112-254.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C044313BF7; Wed, 7 May 2008 00:41:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4821330E.8030101@incunabulum.net> Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 05:41:50 +0100 From: "Bruce M. Simpson" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.14 (Windows/20071210) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <20080503100043.GA68835@k7.mavetju> <481F6AE1.5020408@elischer.org> <20080505231009.GX44028@k7.mavetju> <481F95DE.6090201@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <481F95DE.6090201@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Edwin Groothuis Subject: Re: IPPROTO_DIVERT and PF_INET6 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 04:41:54 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > you could implement a whole new protocol family of which there > was a single protocol.. divert. That's sheer overkill for what Edwin needs to be able to do. We already have a bunch of apps which use divert sockets in the IPv4 space, why should the existing semantics change? Divert sockets are still tied to the transport you instantiate them with, and they have always been a special case anyway depending on where one wishes to draw the lines. There is no reason per se, that I can see, why the IPPROTO_DIVERT identifier can't just be re-used along with pf_proto_register() for PF_INET6, and I've said this to Edwin off-list. A PROTO_SPACER entry just needs to be added to in6protosw. I was surprised to learn no-one had gone ahead and actually implemented it already as there are a few cases in IPv6 which might warrant it (6to4, Teredo etc.) If I'm missing anything obvious please let me know. cheers BMS