From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue May  9 23:23:17 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E4F216A400
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Tue,  9 May 2006 23:23:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lioux@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from vette.gigo.com (vette.gigo.com [216.218.228.114])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23BDE43D45
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Tue,  9 May 2006 23:23:17 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from lioux@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from 201.34.229.158 (201-34-229-158.bsace703.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br
	[201.34.229.158]) by vette.gigo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3689754A4
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Tue,  9 May 2006 16:23:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 54428 invoked by uid 1001); 9 May 2006 20:18:48 -0300
Message-ID: <20060509231911.54375.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 20:18:48 -0300
From: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@FreeBSD.org>
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
References: <20060505033749.76815.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here>
	<20060505192943.Q17611@fledge.watson.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060505192943.Q17611@fledge.watson.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: RFC {get,set}socktopt SO_DONTFRAGMENT
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 23:23:17 -0000

On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 07:30:14PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
> Delivered-To: lioux-freebsd@localhost
> Delivered-To: lioux@freebsd.org
> X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
> Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
> Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 19:30:37 +0100 (BST)
> From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
> X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org
> To: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@FreeBSD.org>
> In-Reply-To: <20060505033749.76815.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here>
> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
> Subject: Re: RFC {get,set}socktopt SO_DONTFRAGMENT
> X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
> Precedence: list
> Errors-To: owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
> 
> On Fri, 5 May 2006, Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira wrote:
> 
> >	I would like to propose a new socket option: SO_DONTFRAGMENT on the 
> >lines of IP_DONTFRAG.
> 
> I'm confused.  Why not just use the IP_DONTFRAG socket option?  I must be 
> missing something pretty basic here. :-)

	I was thinking of a blanket option that would cover anything
a socket could have instead of having options inside "every" single
place.

	Of couse, IP_DONTFRAG applies very well in most situations.
However, I don't think that SO_DONTFRAGMENT would be a replacement
but rather a more "generic" option.

	Well, I could just be missing something and saying something
naive. :) So I apologize if I am missing something obvious.

	Regards,

-- 
Mario S F Ferreira - DF - Brazil - "I guess this is a signature."
feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature