>That's one possibility, probably the most sane.  (you don't want to
>change the existing value for the sparc, because of binary
>compatibility, and if sparc64's different, that's probably for a good reason.
>> 	I'm not sure if this is possible for the kernel side to dance like
>> 	this...
>the kernel is just software.

	we end up having two code for sys/netinet6 or sys/kern/uipc_socket.c,
	is it really something what we want to do?

itojun