Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:39:11 +0000 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: des@FreeBSD.ORG, bright@cygnus.rush.net Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ioctl(... TUNSLMODE ...) Message-ID: <200001201939.TAA01260@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
I know this is a while in coming, but now that I'm looking at getting
ppp(8) to talk IPv6 (with the help of some KAME patches), I've looked
at how TUNSLMODE is implemented... it doesn't look good to me.
What's the rationale behind stuffing the entire sockaddr in front of
the packet ? AFAIK the only information of any use is the address
family.
By default, OpenBSD has a u_int32_t in front of every packet (I
believe this is unconfigurable), and I think this is about the most
sensible thing to do - I don't see that alignment issues will cause
problems.
Alfred, this was originally submitted by you. Do you have any
argument against me changing it to just stuff the address family
as a 4-byte network-byte-order quantity there ?
Any other opinions/arguments ?
Cheers.
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@FreeBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>; <brian@OpenBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! <brian@FreeBSD.org.uk>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200001201939.TAA01260>