Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 23:26:38 PST From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com> To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> Cc: fenner@parc.xerox.com, Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: I rather see the tcp/ip stack fixed than vat patched Message-ID: <97Dec26.232638pst.177484@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 26 Dec 97 23:05:08 PST." <199712270705.XAA00514@rah.star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> wrote: >Bill care to comment? For the first patch, I fail to see how adding a setsockopt to set IP_MULTICAST_LOOP to its default value when creating a new socket changes anything. For the second patch, if that's how the kernel behaves, then vat should deal with it and although the kernel should be fixed, it makes sense to make vat deal with earlier kernels. I don't have a test machine available to me now, so if you want anything more from me it'll have to wait until I get back to CA. Bill
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?97Dec26.232638pst.177484>