Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Nate Lawson <nate@almond.elite.net>
To:        fenner@parc.xerox.com (Bill Fenner)
Cc:        nate@elite.net, fenner@parc.xerox.com, julian@whistle.com, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Apparent bug in sendto() with raw sockets
Message-ID:  <199806252220.PAA28609@almond.elite.net>
In-Reply-To: <98Jun25.150659pdt.177515@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> from "Bill Fenner" at Jun 25, 98 03:06:52 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In a previous message, Bill Fenner said:
>In message <199806252129.OAA24992@almond.elite.net> Nate Lawson wrote:
>>Since traceroute ships as a standard utility with FreeBSD, couldn't the
>>change to network byte order be done simultaneously, minimizing headaches?
>
>The standard utilities could be changed easily.  I'm worried about
>compatibility with externally-written programs; e.g. the binary-only
>"pathchar" from LBL would become useless on an OS with this change.
>Externally-written programs that are written to the well known BSD raw
>socket interface would all have to be patched to work with an updated
>system, as well.  (For example, LBL's traceroute program.)

A friend of mine, jpm@elite.net, suggested that it might be possible to handle
both orderings (like endian-switching on an Alpha).  The only thing I see
this would break is raw packets over 32768 bytes long (i.e. if ip_len >
32768, swap bytes and use the result).

Might a sysctl variable also be an option?

I know that 2.0.5R behaved the way that OpenBSD and Linux behave.  Were there
any complaints or problems with it back then?

-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?199806252220.PAA28609>