On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 03:51:18PM +0100, Jesper Skriver wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 02:46:21AM -0800, Don Lewis wrote:
>
> > } @@ -714,6 +715,15 @@
> > } (lport && inp->inp_lport != lport) ||
> > } (laddr.s_addr && inp->inp_laddr.s_addr != laddr.s_addr) ||
> > } (fport && inp->inp_fport != fport)) {
> > } + inp = inp->inp_list.le_next;
> > } + continue;
> >
> > Wouldn't it be more cleaner (gets rid of the loop) and more efficient (if
> > we're getting blasted with ICMP messages) to use in_pcblookup_hash()?
>
> I didn't change the loop, but I'll have a look at this code, to see if
> we can improve it, but again, to get moving, I'd like to commit this,
> and leave this for a later improvement, ok ?
I've looked at this, and as far as I can see we cannot use
in_pcblookup_hash, as it lookup a single session, and the code can in
other cases act on multiple sessions, path MTU discovery is such a case.
/Jesper
--
Jesper Skriver, jesper(at)skriver(dot)dk - CCIE #5456
Work: Network manager @ AS3292 (Tele Danmark DataNetworks)
Private: Geek @ AS2109 (A much smaller network ;-)
One Unix to rule them all, One Resolver to find them,
One IP to bring them all and in the zone to bind them.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
