At 06:58 PM 2/9/97 -0500, Marc Horowitz wrote:
>Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@orchard.medford.ma.us> writes:
>
>>> An idea which has occurred to me was to add a new signal,
>>> SIGIFCH, analogous to SIGWINCH, which is delivered to user
>>> processes expressing interest in it when the "local address set" of a
>>> system changes.
>
>Instead of adding a new signal, you could do something akin to (or
>using) the routing socket.

Yes, you could but do you really need something that sophisticated
or that large?

Another idea is to allow non-prived processes to open routing sockets
but only allow if_msg's to delivered to them.  sending would be prohibited.
This would give interfaces up/down status as well as addresses.

-- 
Matt Thomas                      Internet:   matt@lkg.dec.com
UNIX Networking                  WWW URL:    http://ftp.digital.com/%7Ethomas/
Digital Equipment Corporation    Disclaimer: This message reflects my own
Littleton, MA                                warped views, etc.