Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:29:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Nate Lawson <nate@almond.elite.net> To: fenner@parc.xerox.com (Bill Fenner) Cc: julian@whistle.com, fenner@parc.xerox.com, nate@elite.net, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Apparent bug in sendto() with raw sockets Message-ID: <199806252129.OAA24992@almond.elite.net> In-Reply-To: <199806251840.LAA14290@mango.parc.xerox.com> from "Bill Fenner" at Jun 25, 98 11:40:54 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In a previous message, Bill Fenner said: >In message <Pine.BSF.3.95.980625101801.21522C-100000@current1.whistle.com>you w >rite: >>Why are we ... different? > >Because the original implementation of raw sockets (the patches >included with LBL's traceroute) simply exposed ip_output()'s >interface, which requires length and offset in host order. AFAIK, >this original implementation happened on suns, which is why nobody >noticed at the time. We are compatible with this original >implementation. OpenBSD and Linux chose to change the semantics >to the ones that are less surprising but not backwards compatible. The fix was to place ip->ip_id in host order (it wasn't zero-length in the original code). Since traceroute ships as a standard utility with FreeBSD, couldn't the change to network byte order be done simultaneously, minimizing headaches? Current versions of traceroute circulating around the net also assume the proper behavior (network byte order for everything), so they should work then as well. Thanks for the help, Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806252129.OAA24992>