Subject: Re: Router Alert IPv4 Option
To: Randy Turner , Darren Reed <email@example.com>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: 07/23/2001 00:19:29
> I wouldn't think setsockopt() would be the right "level" to implement
> the router alert option.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned here is that implementing this
option really means two things.
One is the one that seems to be getting discussed, making NetBSD notice
it when acting as a router.
The other seems to be getting completely ignored, that being making
NetBSD capable of generating the option when sending packets.
For the latter, I think setsockopt is exactly right.
For the former, I'm not at all sure. I haven't yet had the brain
cycles to think about it enough; I'm not convinced setsockopt is wrong,
but I'm definitely not convinced it's right.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML firstname.lastname@example.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B