Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:56:55 -0500 From: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@crodrigues.org> To: src-committers@FreeBSD.org Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/net Makefile.inc sctp_sys_calls.c src/sys/sys param.h Message-ID: <20061215145655.GA13912@crodrigues.org> In-Reply-To: <20061215055704.A65183@xorpc.icir.org> References: <200612151201.kBFC1qEv006825@repoman.freebsd.org> <4582A1E0.1050503@freebsd.org> <4582A6C9.8010009@FreeBSD.org> <20061215055704.A65183@xorpc.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 05:57:04AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> i think Andre's question was this:
> normally we use {set|get}sockopt() to configure the socket
> as desired for special features (e.g. multicast is one).
>
> Why is it undesirable to use the same kind of overloading
> for sctp ?
I think some of the reasons for why a new sockets API
was introduced for SCTP was outlined in:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpsocket-14.txt
...but I'll let Randall chime in too. :)
--
Craig Rodrigues
rodrigc@crodrigues.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061215145655.GA13912>