On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 03:36:53PM -0700, jonathan@dsg.stanford.edu wrote:
> I am still very peturbed by the XXX comment. If someone like fvdl
> doesn't grok why the setsockopt() is needed, we need a better
> explanation. And I'm worried by both the dependency on the strncmp()
> matching both "inet" and "inet6", when what's really meant is
> 	"are we running over TCP"?

FTR, I'm not really a fan of this use of strncmp().  OTOH, your
suggestion assumes there will never be an incompatible protocol named
"TCP" in another protocol family.  Is this a safe assumption?  Who
knows.  I think it's better to test the protocol family *and* protocol
if you're trying to be "careful".