From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep  2 15:53:24 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E816916A4C0
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue,  2 Sep 2003 15:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hysteria.spc.org (hysteria.spc.org [195.206.69.234])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6C66A43FCB
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue,  2 Sep 2003 15:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bms@hysteria.spc.org)
Received: (qmail 975 invoked by uid 5013); 2 Sep 2003 22:50:06 -0000
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 23:50:06 +0100
From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
To: "millarkav@yahoo.com" <millarkav@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030902225006.GN1417@spc.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>,
	"millarkav@yahoo.com" <millarkav@yahoo.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
References: <20030902224333.19060.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030902224333.19060.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Organization: SPC
cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: UDP Socket Options
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:53:25 -0000

On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 03:43:33PM -0700, millarkav@yahoo.com wrote:
> FreeBSD ought to add per-socket socket options to
> allow a programmer to turn  on and off the don't
> fragment bit for UDP and the UDP checksum, on a per
> socket basis.

Why? Sure, it would be easy enough to do, but why exactly do you need this?

Rewriting traceroute without recourse to SOCK_RAW is one possible use
that springs to mind. But can you elaborate?

BMS