From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 26 12:58:50 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0FC6106564A; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:58:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F508FC18; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:58:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bms@incunabulum.net) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA68634615D; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:40:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:40:29 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: PcYqjyj+/21jhY7xXwNmBvKMtA2Vxo1JrZksEdCTZHnB 1243341629 Received: from [192.168.123.18] (82-35-112-254.cable.ubr07.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.35.112.254]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2EB445404A; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:40:29 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A1BE33B.7010106@incunabulum.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 13:40:27 +0100 From: Bruce Simpson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linimon@FreeBSD.org References: <200905251326.n4PDQglK003602@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200905251326.n4PDQglK003602@freefall.freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/134931: [route] [fib] Route messages sent to all socket listeners regardless of setfib X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 12:58:51 -0000 linimon@FreeBSD.org wrote: > Synopsis: [route] [fib] Route messages sent to all socket listeners regardless of setfib > That might actually be a feature, however, the "API contract" with the multiple routing table support might not have covered this, so it might be "undefined behaviour".