Re: happy eyesockets

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost (Michael van Elst) writes:

> gdt%lexort.com@localhost (Greg Troxel) writes:
>
>>I don't object and I think you have a good point, but what do the
>>standards say?
>
> RFC1122 describes how to handle ICMP messages and distinguishes
> between soft errors (event gets registered, but protocol continues)
> and hard errors (a TCP connection is aborted).

As I understand you, the proposed chagne is noncompilant, and thus
presumptively shouldn't go in.  Is that how you see it?