From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org  Tue Jun  6 06:40:41 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCC8BF772F
 for <freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Tue,  6 Jun 2017 06:40:41 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from hmurray@megapathdsl.net)
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net
 (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC3D805D3
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue,  6 Jun 2017 06:40:40 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from hmurray@megapathdsl.net)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3FE406063;
 Mon,  5 Jun 2017 23:40:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
cc: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Subject: Anybody using SO_BINTIME with IPv6?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 23:40:39 -0700
Message-Id: <20170606064039.4F3FE406063@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 06:40:41 -0000


I'm cleaning up some code.  SO_BINTIME works with IPv4.  SO_TIMESTAMP works 
with IPv4 and IPv6.

But SO_BINTIME doesn't work with IPv6.  setsockopt works, but recvmsg doesn't 
return any cmsg data.

If this is a known problem, I'll just use SO_TIMESTAMP and accept the reduced 
resolution.  If somebody has a working example, I'll work harder on finding a 
bug/quirk and/or making a simple test case.
 

-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.