From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Dec 26 22:33:27 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA07591 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 26 Dec 1997 22:33:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA07549 for ; Fri, 26 Dec 1997 22:32:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA00277; Fri, 26 Dec 1997 22:32:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Message-Id: <199712270632.WAA00277@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 To: Luigi Rizzo cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I rather see the tcp/ip stack fixed than vat patched In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 27 Dec 1997 05:56:04 +0100." <199712270456.FAA07646@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 22:32:28 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > Amancio said: > > > I rather see the tcp/ip stack fixed than vat patched > > > > Tnks, > > Amancio > > I brought out the things some time ago but there was not much reaction > or agreement on what to do (yes, I know, I should learn CVS, get commit > privs and act...) > > Furthermore I am not fully convinced that our udp stack is broken. For > the first patch, having loopback on multicast socket is a configurable > feature so there is no point in changin the default behaviour when 1-2 > line change can fix the thing. That depends if it should be the default behavior or not. > For the ICMP response behaviour, I agree that there would be better > to fix the kernel but the current behaviour is not totally unreasonable. Again, is a matter of consistency. Regards, Amancio