From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jul 11 19:06:59 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00526 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Jul 1998 19:06:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpha.xerox.com (omega.Xerox.COM [13.1.64.95]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA00502 for ; Sat, 11 Jul 1998 19:06:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner@parc.xerox.com) Received: from mango.parc.xerox.com ([13.1.102.232]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <40827(1)>; Sat, 11 Jul 1998 14:01:19 PDT Received: from mango.parc.xerox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mango.parc.xerox.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA21311; Sat, 11 Jul 1998 14:01:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner@mango.parc.xerox.com) Message-Id: <199807112101.OAA21311@mango.parc.xerox.com> To: "Jason K. Fritcher" cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Raw sockets & ICMP In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 09 Jul 1998 23:31:04 PDT." Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 14:01:16 PDT From: Bill Fenner Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG As far as I can tell, the design of raw sockets was kind of ad-hoc, so I wouldn't necessarily call it "intentional". The idea is that you would use a raw socket to provide services that the kernel doesn't, so there's no need to send the messages that the kernel has already handled to a raw socket. The easiest solution is to use bpf instead of raw sockets, since its interface is cleaner. Bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message