From owner-freebsd-net Thu Jun 25 10:29:41 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA17121 for freebsd-net-outgoing; Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:29:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA17115; Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:29:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA13476; Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd013465; Thu Jun 25 17:19:12 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:18:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Bill Fenner cc: Nate Lawson , freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Apparent bug in sendto() with raw sockets In-Reply-To: <199806251643.JAA13888@mango.parc.xerox.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Why are we grtuiously different? I vaguely remember something about this a few years ago.. On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Bill Fenner wrote: > Fill in the IP length field. You're writing what claims to be a zero-length > packet, and the kernel doesn't think that's a good idea. > > The IP length field (and the IP offset, if you ever fill that in) need > to be stored in host byte order, not network byte order. Linux and > OpenBSD want the fields in network byte order. > > Bill > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message