Subject: Re: Router Alert
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Jason R Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/21/2000 08:50:29
On Wed, Apr 19, 2000 at 01:05:56PM -0700, Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> This is the right behaviour, but it is wrong to do this unconditionally. You
> only want to receive Router Alert packets that some process on the box has
> expressed an interest in seeing (i.e. that have a particular protocol, or
> protocol/port number, value). All other Router Alert packets need to be
> forwarded normally.
Ok, this makes a lot more sense to me.
> What we do is open a socket that receives the packets we are interested in
> (e.g. a raw socket receiving RSVP or IGMP packets), and then set a socket
> option which indicates that we are also interested in receiving matching
> Router Alert packets as well. When the socket closes, the Router Alert
Yah, cool. Can you tell me the name of your socket option? No use in it
being gratuitously different.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <email@example.com>