Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 17:51:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Renumbering IPPROTO_DIVERT Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0210251751080.9065-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200210260047.RAA01665@windsor.research.att.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think the right thing is to continue to steal the number for a transition period On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Bill Fenner wrote: > > >I think though that there should be a "compat" shim that > >does the right thing but is VERY NOISY. > > What's the right thing? > > I think the right thing is to open a real raw socket. If we are really > feeling generous, print a message that someone used the old divert socket > and if they meant to use the old divert socket they need to be recompiled. > > (Recall that this silent failure mode is the same behavior that a > DIVERT-using application sees if it is run on a kernel without IPDIVERT, > so people should be used to it.) > > Bill > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0210251751080.9065-100000>